Every new technology upends the social order in some way, big or small. Many centuries ago, when the printing press arrived, it probably raised the level of our collective knowledge and was also used to churn out propaganda. A couple of decades ago, when the internet was arriving as the new gateway to information, there was some skepticism, but mostly there was hope. Skeptics said that the internet would polarize us, that it would be a tool for propaganda and misinformation. While there was some evidence of this happening, it was easy to find counter examples. However, in today's social media driven world, I realize that the skeptics were right. Social media has poisoned our discourse. Social media is distinctly different from search in how it intermediates information. I'd like to explain how.
Let's say you have some time and want to read something. You have limited time and can't go through everything. You pick up an information intermediary that gives you a shortlist of choices after sifting through and selecting what they think you would like to read. You may pick up a magazine, you may look for something on Google, or you could go to Facebook.
The goal of an information intermediary is to give you a list of compelling choices by best predicting your choices based on following four parameters: topic, author, external validation and content:
The first infers relevance from a network of content inspired by a system of references and whereas the second infers relevance from a network of relationships and past impulsive behavior, i.e. system 1 decisions. Search is inspired by how academic research is valued, Facebook by popularity contests in high school.
The world has become more polarized. People are easily incensed. Rational argumentation has all but disappeared. I feel that technology occupies centre-stage in this transformation. While the weblink structure use in search is open and can be studied independently, Facebook data and network of interactions is invisible and cannot really be studied.
Let's say you have some time and want to read something. You have limited time and can't go through everything. You pick up an information intermediary that gives you a shortlist of choices after sifting through and selecting what they think you would like to read. You may pick up a magazine, you may look for something on Google, or you could go to Facebook.
The goal of an information intermediary is to give you a list of compelling choices by best predicting your choices based on following four parameters: topic, author, external validation and content:
| Is this topic of interest to you? (title/keywords/content) | Is this a topic that is similar to things you have liked before? |
| Is the author an expert on the topic? | Did one of your friends write it? (authorship) |
| Did one of your friends react to it? (shares/likes) | Have other experts referred to it and written about it? (links, references) |
| Is the content linked to or by other pieces of authoritative content? | Would you have the time and the attention span? (virality/short/crisp) |
The first infers relevance from a network of content inspired by a system of references and whereas the second infers relevance from a network of relationships and past impulsive behavior, i.e. system 1 decisions. Search is inspired by how academic research is valued, Facebook by popularity contests in high school.
The world has become more polarized. People are easily incensed. Rational argumentation has all but disappeared. I feel that technology occupies centre-stage in this transformation. While the weblink structure use in search is open and can be studied independently, Facebook data and network of interactions is invisible and cannot really be studied.
No comments:
Post a Comment