I obtained off Facebook about 10 years in the past. I do know that this has had no affect on the firm or its enterprise mannequin. When I noticed in 2007 that Facebook was selling user information, I knew I couldn’t keep on the platform for much longer. But the lure of community results, the place it takes nearly no effort to attach with different individuals, is simply too highly effective for many of us.
Facebook is convenient. For most companies it’s suicide to not be on Facebook. It is an especially handy solution to join all of your on-line communication and most of your digital content material consumption. It is so handy that it’s the solely manner some individuals join on-line. In thinking about Facebook, I famous that we could also be heading towards a platform-dominated international social community that won’t solely form our behaviour however slender the scope of our humanity.
“The REAL danger facing a world interconnected by social networking isn’t disruption … This danger is an all encompassing online orthodoxy. A sameness of thought and approach enforced by hundreds of millions of socially internetworked adherents. A global orthodoxy that ruthless narrows public thought down to a single, barren, ideological framework. A ruling network that prevents dissent and locks us into stagnation and inevitable failure as it runs afoul of reality and human nature.” —John Robb, Global Guerrillas 2017-09-22
Christopher Wylie blew the whistle on Cambridge Analytica, an organization with preliminary defence roots that used Facebook information to profile voters and then use focused promoting to affect the democratic course of — particularly the Brexit referendum and the final US presidential election.
An individual’s on-line id has now turn into a necessary function of their social and skilled life. Opting out is tantamount to operating away to reside in the wilderness. It’s doable however self-destructive. “To exist in modern society,” he [Wylie] tells us, “you don’t really have a choice but to use these platforms.”
He then repeats his important level: “The internet is part and parcel of democracy now, whether you like it or not … Do we need rules that we as a society agree on, with independent regulators who are on our side, not on shareholders’ side?” —Peter Isackson, Fair Observer 2019-10-16
We now reside in a surveillance financial system. That shouldn’t be going to vary in the brief run. But except we transfer past our tribal tendencies we won’t be able counter populism (made extra excessive by actors like Cambridge Analytica) nor enhance democracy. In order to thrive in a networked world we’ll want a new form of democracy.