Social Media’s Vicious Cycle

Social Media’s Vicious Cycle

Across the globe people tune into their favorite social media in order to keep up with their friends, the news, or just to pass time. With all the users’ likes and shares they create data for the social media companies. Personal data is very valuable and there has been evidence that the social media platform Facebook has violated that privacy for the sake of creating targeted ads. These ads are not required to be fact based, and can easily be vessels for hate speech, largely because the company lacks accountability and the more sensationalism there is the longer people stay online. Users have a false sense of connectivity on social media, making them more vulnerable to various types of information online. The personal connections users feel while on the screen likely intensify the less fulfilling their face-to-face social life is. As long as social media platforms such as Facebook lack accountability for what they do with users’ data and they propagate sensationalism, social media will remain a threat to democracy.

Social media platforms sell their users’ personal data, that can come from not just name and location, but from countless likes and shares, to other major corporations that want to create targeted advertisements. And perhaps that would not even be that bad if there were not a hunger for more, that encourages the companies to take it too far and throw their morals out the window as they sell to anyone no matter how obviously sketchy their agenda is. The most clearly inexcusable has been Facebook allowing Russia to purchase targeted advertisement space in order to manipulate Americans and influence their decisions in the United States’ 2016 presidential election. This was coupled with the stealing of personal data from 87 million people, which made targeting individuals much easier (Cadwalladr). In a democracy the citizens choose their president, and Facebook’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, is showing through his actions and inactions, that he does not value that system. After investigative journalists started coming after him and his foul play in diplomatic relations, he has ultimately had no consequences for his actions. If they requested data that could possibly indicate his level of criminality, all he had to say was no. Therefore he continues to conduct Facebook, and Facebook continues to consider likeability and shareability top priority, which quickly allows sensationalism to rise to the top, because that is what keeps people online sharing their data and in turn making the social media company money. 

This is how social media poses a threat to democracy. The Omidyar Group, started by the founder of eBay notes, “The low barriers to creation and distribution of online content have facilitated massive growth in ‘news publishers’ whose models maximize attention and engagement with low regard for quality control or traditional journalistic ethics” (Deb). If news in America is no longer questioning and challenging those in positions of power, and instead is validating false, incomplete, misleading, sensationalist information, then democracy is threatened. Ethical journalists whose stories Americans hear through various channels of media are crucial to the frameworks of democracy. They provide information to Americans so that they are empowered to make the best decisions they can for themselves and their community. If that information is wrong and/or reinforces hate and fear, then people cannot make informed decisions and results in a dysfunctional society. 

People who are lonely are those who tend to spend the most time on social media, and those who spend more time on social media become lonelier. The more people are lonely or unhappy with themselves the more likely they are to lash out on others. Social media, especially Facebook, profits off of the deteriorating mental health of individuals who feel isolated and disenfranchised. The youthful demographic targeted by Facebook is very vulnerable, so this sets the stage for Facebook to exploit this population. And one should be wary wherever power coalesces. According to Rose, “The Internet doesn’t steal our humanity, it reflects it.” Although he says it in the context of humanity’s good will, this should worry us, humanity contains both good and evil. And evil is especially fond of anything powerful, including intense emotions. Loneliness, and in extreme cases, hate, festers in people as all the things they like, or admire, or wish for, come back to haunt them; they are reminded of all the things they are not, or that they do not have. These reminders happen constantly as social media competes for “users to spend more time on their platforms…” (Waterson). This makes people feel more inadequate and lonelier. And the lonelier a person feels the more likely they are to try to fill that void by going on/staying on social media. And so, the cycle continues. In fact, as they are increasingly filled with self-hate, shame or embarrassment, they are more likely to spend their energy hating others than doing something constructive. 

         The users are constantly treated like pawns in a game they cannot yet understand, while also being the remaining line of defense. But as long as users value a post’s popularity, not its credibility, they will not be a very strong line of defense. People see something that has gone viral or is from a “verified” page or profile, or just came from their favorite news group on Facebook, they have an emotional reaction and end up liking it and sharing it further; they don’t check facts. These users are very trusting when they are on social media because they feel more personally connected to everything. Sensationalism on social media is popular because it alleviates loneliness, the user feels like they are a part of something, whether it be a small group or the whole world. Therefore, when people are lonely, they are more likely to be consuming this type of media, instead of spending time with themselves or others. And when people are lonely, they are unhappy, and then they are more likely to be hateful and spread hateful media. They choose to push the hate on others because they don’t like themselves or fear what they don’t understand, because they don’t get much exposure online all day. There has to be an emergence of people from behind their screens to realize there is something wrong and take action. 

There needs to be a focus on making Facebook’s CEO, and others involved, accountable for the crimes they committed getting their fingerprints all over government elections. Perhaps social media should be non-profit? Perhaps there should be tags on posts indicating whether or not they are corroborated by primary or secondary sources? And there needs to be a discussion about social media’s very real addictive qualities and how the platforms need to take responsibility in order to safeguard against it. Maybe there should be the equivalent of cigarette pack labels? And there needs to be an understanding that in order to reduce the harm of these “connective” platforms people must spend less time on them (Hobson). Because they really do help us stay connected to those who are already closest to us, but any shallower interactions can quickly become harmful. And perhaps there are some people who do not worry at all about their privacy being exploited because that brings them advertisements for goods and services they are interested in and because that is what keeps the platform free. But because companies refuse to be transparent about what all exactly is being done with everyone’s data, there is reason to believe that a price will be paid and just not with money. People will continue to suffer as a part of society if social media is not held accountable for its actions. It should not be allowed for them to just say no and stutter out some frilly phrases to the camera with a forlorn face and everything be alright. For the sake of a few small individuals attempting to hold on to their power, democracy is the price they are willing to pay.

 

 

Works Cited

Cadwalladr, Carole. “Transcript of ‘Facebook's Role in Brexit -- and the Threat to Democracy.’” TED, 2019, www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_in_brexit_and_the_threat_to_democracy/transcript?language=en.

Deb, Anamitra et al. “Is Social Media a Threat to Democracy.” The Omidyar Group, 1 Oct. 2107, https://www.omidyargroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Social-Media-and-Democracy-October-5-2017.pdf

Hobson, Katherine. “Feeling Lonely? Too Much Time On Social Media May Be Why.” NPR, NPR, 6 Mar. 2017, www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/03/06/518362255/feeling-lonely-too-much-time-on-social-media-may-be-why.

Rose, Josh. “How Social Media Is Having a Positive Impact On Our Culture [OPINION].” Mashable, Mashable, 23 Feb. 2011, mashable.com/2011/02/23/social-media-culture/#fpq0_ADLJ8q8.

Waterson, Jim. “Social Media Addiction Should Be Seen as a Disease, MPs Say.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 18 Mar. 2019, www.theguardian.com/media/2019/mar/18/social-media-addiction-should-be-seen-as-disease-mps-say.