AS the number of Facebook, Twitter and other social media users increase, these sites become key battlefields of political struggle and the major sources of voters’ information. This evolution is primarily as a result of algorithms that are developed to optimize engagement of clients in social sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram among others. These algorithms work on user engagement history and generate user specific timelines. To this extent, this personalization retains users on the platforms while playing an important role in the deepening of polarization by offering echo chambers where users are mostly presented with affirming opinions.
The underlying mechanics of these algorithms are simple yet powerful: it is always better to focus on content that stirs users in some way. Active content draws the user’s emotions, leading to increased sharing and commenting, which creates the desired engagement and dwell time on the platform. This model prefers sensational or highly polarizing content for entertainment, which is interesting but unhelpful in providing balanced, accurate views. Such content leads to filter bubbles—people are fed more from one side of the political spectrum and less from the other. The lack of exposure to different opinions can widen the polarization between political rivals and increase animosity. Research shows that the political nature of polarization on social media is elicited by the algorithms of the platforms in question. Consistently consuming political content from a single side has been found to cause user polarization due to the amplification of their opinions. These algorithms produce feedback loops, where interactions with specific content dictate more of the same, thereby reinforcing users’ biases. In the long run, this increases the gap between populations as individuals become less open-minded toward differing perspectives.
These algorithms also result in the diffusion of mis-information another crucial matter. Social media sites such as Facebook have come under scrutiny for their part in spreading fake news, which gets much more attention than real news. In particular, during certain election periods, the spreading of misdeclarations influences the civil population and directs voters’ choices. This is rather worrisome as the election process can only be credible if the electorate is well informed. However, this unhealthy algorithm driven dynamics are recognized with potential harm, there is growing demand for changes. Others suggest that algorithms must be adjusted to make more diverse content for there to be less echo chambers. Some call for specific practices such as the companies to do a better job to explain their algorithms to the public and for others argue maybe these platforms should be regulated to see they do not endanger democracy.
Despite this, it is critical to observe the fact that polarization is influenced by social media although it is not the main determinant. It is also important to note that cultural changes and economic realities as well as traditional mediums also have huge parts to play in political arenas. However, unlike other forms of media, social media algorithmic operations to enhance and promote specific content afford it as a political tool in the current world. Minimizing the negative impacts of these algorithms can only be done through a collective and coordinated approach from various interests including the manufacturers of the technologies, the government and the users of the technologies. Silicon Valley organizations cannot continue to ignore the effects of their apps on the world’s population. This includes increasing openness and moving to eliminate any role their algorithm plays in societal harm. On the other hand, the authorities must decide on the formation of rules determining design and functioning of such algorithms for the sake of democratic procedures protection.
However, there is also a role in raising awareness of how algorithms function and what implicit bias they might bring into the information space. An informed public is one that can easily choose what media to consume and is wise enough to analyze information found on social media platforms. In addition, to overcome the problem of the presence of fake news it is necessary to work on increasing user recognition of such content to avoid its interaction. The role of social media companies can include the tagging of verified content as well as offering users means by which to report dubious content. Lastly, despite the social structuring affordances of social media to improve public discourse by giving voice to the masses and encouraging active participation in civility, the existing design of social media algorithms go against these opportunities.
The difficulty in addressing these issues is rooted in how best to deal with incorporating these companies’ commercial imperatives while at the same time preserving political debate and democratic institutions. In general, social media algorithms are influential in shaping the voter perception and the levels of polarization within the electorate. This problem can only thus be solved using a systemic approach based on technological tools, the need for new legislations, the mobilization of the public and corporate accountability. Thus, the more the platforms are developing the need for strategies for controlling their impacts increase in order to ensure that democracy is not affected while the social benefits are realized.
—The writer is Lecturer in the Department of History & Politics, University of Haripur, KP.
