Social media can be likened to a vast newsstand, offering an abundance of choices that surpass any physical newsstand. It’s a platform where you can find news from various sources, including journalism outlets, your grandma, friends, celebrities, and people from different countries you’ve never even been to. It’s a feast for the eyes and mind. However, despite the vast range of options, the reality is that most of the time, you don’t get to choose what you see.
On most social media platforms, algorithms use your behavior to determine which posts to show you. For example, if you send a post from a celebrity to a friend but quickly scroll past your grandma’s post, the algorithm may prioritize showing you more content from celebrities. Even when you choose which accounts to follow, the platform’s algorithm still decides which posts to show and bury.
This model has several issues. There’s the risk of being trapped in filter bubbles, where we only see news that aligns with our existing beliefs. Algorithms can also lead us down rabbit holes, pushing us towards more extreme content. Additionally, engagement-driven algorithms often reward outrageous or horrifying content.
However, the most damaging problem lies in who controls these algorithms. We are witnessing a situation where a few profit-oriented corporations have complete control over public discourse, without any obligation to serve the greater good. Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter, now renamed X, exemplifies what can happen when an individual uses a social media platform to promote their political agenda.
Since acquiring the platform, Musk has expressed his desire to combat what he calls the “woke mind virus,” which seems to largely target Democratic and progressive policies. He has reinstated accounts with white supremacist and antisemitic views, banned journalists and activists, and promoted far-right figures such as Tucker Carlson and Andrew Tate. Musk has even changed the platform’s rules to allow users to pay for boosted posts and allegedly manipulated the algorithm to amplify his own content. As a result, Twitter has morphed into a “far-right social network” that promotes the interests, biases, and conspiracy theories of the right-wing in the United States.
While this Twitter takeover exemplifies the issue of algorithmic control, the potential for similar scenarios exists across any tech company. To prevent those seeking to exploit algorithms for power, we need a pro-choice movement for algorithms. Users should have the freedom to decide what they see on their newsfeeds.
In my ideal world, I would have the ability to choose my feed from a list of providers. It would be great to have a curated feed by librarians, who are experts at curating information, or from my preferred news outlet. I would love to compare the feed curated by the American Civil Liberties Union with one curated by the Heritage Foundation. Alternatively, I might prefer to use my friend Susie’s curation because I trust her taste.
Thankfully, there’s a growing global movement advocating for algorithmic choice. For instance, a group in Belgrade is demanding that recommender algorithms should be considered a “public good,” and European regulators are pushing for platforms to provide users with at least one algorithm option that does not rely on tracking user behavior.
One platform striving to make this vision a reality is Bluesky, a social network that recently opened its data to allow developers to create custom algorithms. Supported financially by Twitter founder Jack Dorsey, Bluesky reports that 20 percent of its users are already using custom feeds. On my Bluesky feed, I can switch between feeds like Tech News, Cute Animal Pics, PositiviFeed, and my personal favorite, Home+, which includes interesting content from my extended social circles. Some feeds are developed by Bluesky’s own team, while others are created by external developers. All I have to do is go to “My Feeds” and select a feed from a wide menu of choices, ranging from MLB+ for baseball news to #Disability, which collects posts related to disability or UA fundraising, a feed showcasing Ukrainian fundraising posts.
Having such a diverse selection of feeds frees me from the burden of deciding whom to follow. Switching social networks becomes less exhausting as I don’t have to rebuild my entire Twitter network. Instead, I can explore pre-curated feeds that introduce me to new people and topics.
Bluesky’s CEO, Jay Graber, believes that users should have a say in how their attention is directed, and developers should be free to experiment with innovative ways of presenting information.
However, there are challenges associated with algorithmic choice. Critics of a proposal for external entities to offer algorithmic choice, led by Stanford political science professor Francis Fukuyama, argue that it could absolve platforms of responsibility for failing to remove harmful content. Others express concerns that such an approach wouldn’t address the underlying toxic and manipulative content creation incentivized by some tech platforms’ business models.
While algorithmic choice may not directly solve the issues of toxic content and polarization, it remains important. People often don’t realize they want something until they see its potential, just like when Apple introduced the iPhone. With disinformation spreading during elections, asking individuals to actively choose disinformation rather than passively accepting it could make a difference. The existence of different choices would itself be educational.
Algorithms currently make our choices invisible, and making those choices visible is a crucial step in constructing a healthy information ecosystem.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
