This is as much about Social Media as it is about how capitalism, and the drive for money, has created a reality in American society where the ends, really do, justify the means.
I don't need to elaborate here about the problems with social media. And when I say social media, I am referring to Facebook, Instagram, Tik Tok, YouTube, Twitter, and on and on and on. There is no shortage of articles that show the impact social media has on teenagers (poor self-image, depression, anxiety, etc.), our democracy (pretty much bringing about the ruin of it), human interaction, and the creation of a culture populated by me, myself , and I. It's bad. If you don’t believe me, go do the research yourself.
I am reminded of the numerous times I have told my own friends and family about how they are contributing to the ruin of society every time they go on Facebook. They agree 100%. Less than 24 hours later, one of them is back on Facebook – telling me stories, sending me memes – that they "discovered" on Facebook.
While that is certainly a lot to unpack and this isn’t about my circle of family and friends and their social media habits, it is about why nothing has really changed at Facebook. It is also about why Facebook has more power and influence than ever before. We now live in a fractured society where much smarter people than me can show direct causality between the rise in use of social media leading to the spread of misinformation and the situation America now finds itself in. Studies of teenagers and millennials will tell you that their feelings of depression can be directly correlated to the amount of time they spend on social media. Yet they continue to go down the rabbit hole of YouTube videos that lead to conspiracy theories and lies draped in common sense.
Here is the thing about technology companies, technologists, and people that develop software …
Before I go down this road, let me put my “bona fides” on the table here. I have spent about 20 plus years working in technology, with a good 19 of those spent in and around software development specifically.
Software, unlike hardware, does not suffer from the limitations of hard costs that constrict an individual or company from creating whatever they like. This is important, because if you think about hardware – the chips, the glass, circuits, etc. – these costs limit the creator to focus on what he or she SHOULD create. In contrast, software is only limited by the time someone has to create it. One might argue that time is money, but when compared to something that involves hardware, it really isn’t. This produces the problem that a great deal of software is created because WE CAN create it. Not because WE SHOULD create it.
This is my unified “Because We Can Theory.” The Because We Can Theory, in the case of software, is born out of technologists trying new things, figuring them out, and deciding to use those new things because they are kind of cool. Often, the Because We Can Theory is wrapped in a package of reasonable justification that can easily pass the “that makes sense to me“ test.
A great example of this is the development of JavaScript drop-downs, or fly-out menus, popularized on websites from the early 2000’s. These were a fantastic example of creating something that we CAN create rather than something we SHOULD create. Once developed, a justification was found for them, in this case, enabling a visitor browsing a website to see and navigate the sub-pages. At the time, JavaScript menus seemed reasonable and made sense. But as the experts began to test this functionality it became apparent that, in practice, they frustrated users, were not accessible, and generally turned most websites into a hot mess.
For about the past 15 to 20 years now, software development has dominated financial markets, investment portfolios, and business in general. Many of the founders of these companies are, themselves, software developers who grew up in environments dominated by the Because We Can Theory. I would argue that many of them made it an ethos. And social media, most of all, is representative of my theory gone awry. And yet, the app and software corporations of Silicon Valley that are responsible are still able to dominate the bulk of material wealth in the United States.
Social media is a shining example of something that was created based on the Because We Can Theory and, to a certain extent, has thrived by its creators doubling down on that theory in the pursuit of wealth. The results have been little to no responsibility around the vast number of unintended consequences of social media. The amount of money, time, and energy put into Because We Can projects vastly outstrips the amount of money, time, and energy put into solving (resolving) the problems created by social media companies and the products that most people use daily and worldwide.
Let’s look at Facebook for a few examples of my point:
Sex (and nudity) is bad. As social media grew in popularity, it brought about the rise of pornography’s use of social media. Facebook’s response was to ban all nudity on it’s platforms and thereby communicating a message that all sex, regardless of context, is bad. Over the span of a single decade, the updated community guidelines have institutionalized the notion that sex and nudity is shameful. It has also classified the artistic expression of the human body, sex, and human sexuality as negative. It is critically important to note that institutions like the Catholic Church, radical Islam, Orthodox Judaism, and many other religious organizations have been fighting this battle for centuries and, arguably, have been losing. Social media has been able to contribute to the war against sex in a way that those institutions never dreamed possible. (Too bad Tumblr jumped on the Facebook bandwagon, am I right?)
WHY? It is important to ask why. Because the nuance of pornography is that context matters. We can all agree that child pornography should be criminalized and banned in all forms, along with the exploitation of minors (although the fashion industry has gotten this memo yet). But sorting through pornography and art can be very challenging. Where does the healthy expression and access to sexual imagery end and exploitation begin? How do you display content and imagery that might be age specific if you aren’t really that concerned about the age of your users? Facebook is unable, and unwilling, to dive into this argument. So they have decided to ban it all. Which includes the artist who happens to paint nude figures. It also has placed a chilling effect on people seeking legitimate knowledge about sex and sexuality. Access to good, factual information has been proven to result in all people, but especially young people, making better and safer choices about sex and sexuality.
Disinformation campaigns run amuck. Conspiracy theories about the government, lies, and political advertising that should be regulated but isn’t. Again, how do you police what appears to be a regular citizen expressing his/her freedom of speech on the platform when you don’t know their motivations, who is paying for them to post these things, and what their intended outcome is? You can’t. Because you don’t require people to register with any real credentials, they just need an email address. The consequence is Russian and other foreign entities posing as American citizens and posting false information in an effort to undermine our democracy. And guess what? They succeeded! Facebook has done very little to combat this. As I sit down and write this essay, we are in the middle of a disputed election where lies and misinformation are still the basis of legal challenges, fomenting dissent, and working to drive a deeper wedge between Americans. We all know what propaganda is and most people would probably say it is a bad thing. Yet, I would suggest that a large percentage of Americans currently believe things that are, outright, not true because propaganda has influenced them. Ironic, isn’t it?
WHY? Again, it is important to ask why Facebook is doing nothing about this. My answer … because it is hard. Facebook does not possess the will to dedicate human resources to make judgment calls about these types of free speech. When it gets it wrong, they are derided, so they don’t bother trying. Furthermore, they never designed the software with any thought to Because We Should, they designed it using the Because We Can standard. Therefore building controls into the software, around how users set up accounts, who can and can’t advertise, political advertising that doesn’t violate laws, etc. was never a part of their software usability plan.
I could go on, but I hope you get the point.
I want to dive into the last part which ties directly to the system of how these companies make money (I am pointing the finger primarily at Facebook and Instagram, but YouTube, Snapchat, Twitter, and others also have culpability here). This is where the ends justify the means. Our free markets have rewarded the relentless pursuit of short-term gains through a mostly unregulated stock market that benefits a very small percentage of Americans: Wealthy Americans. This reality has caused the markets to reward companies like Facebook and therefore, indirectly, tell the founders that what they are doing is OK because it is making a small percentage of the people in this country a lot of money. The net result is more revenue for Facebook and greater shareholder value as evidenced by increases in their stock price. Again, this only benefits a small portion of the population.
So the ends – more money – justifies the means. The means, in this case, are things like:
The erosion of our democratic system of government.
The fracturing of our society through increased tribalism that often doesn’t benefit either group.
The infliction of emotional distress and psychological damage on an entire generation.
The enablement of foreign, and corrupt, dictatorships/authoritarian regimes—you fill in the blank—that are parading around as legitimate systems of government and oppressing their people, but also have a vested interest in making our system of government look idiotic (In truth, we do look pretty idiotic at this point).
The proliferation of dated ideas about race, gender, and sexual orientation that were used to oppress or brutalize people for thousands of years and prevent us from normalizing equality for all in a free and open society.
These are just a few, but illustrate the point. Technology companies, specifically software companies are a big part of the problem. Social media has given us a shining example of why we SHOULD NOT do something. And yet it thrives because millions of people across the world now believe that is how they should get their information and engage with people socially. But it is all a lie.
It remains to be seen if people will wake up and realize that the best thing they can do is to delete their social media accounts and make an earnest attempt to engage others in meaningful ways. It remains to be seen if our now broken system of government can repair itself and have the presence of mind to regulate and hold Facebook and other social media companies accountable. That is the role of government, to protect the citizens it governs. But that doesn’t work very well now in large part because the thing it needs to protect us from is the same thing that is preventing the government from functioning as it should.
I hope everyone can take a step back and see this. I hope.
- M
Copyright © 2020 - Malcolm Bolivar. All Rights Reserved.
