Introduction
Due to the rapid development of information and communication technology(ICT), information transmission and distribution in human society has fundamentally transformed. Authors of both the given articles notice that our information society is gradually moving away from the old broadcast media to a new networked media. Ideally, such transformation should be considered as a blessing because it is rather difficult for totalitarian governments or authoritative organizations to censor media information. Now netizens can upload or share their posts, videos, articles, musics, photos, etc, through social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter or instagram. Unlike traditional media types, the power is no longer within the hands of people who control the media outlets but in the hands of those who can capture audiences’ attention. As such, governments or authoritative organizations which regulate media channels can not really control the flow of information on social media. In each second, hundreds of thousands of user generated contents will be uploaded via the internet. Without strict government censorship and information control, one technological hope is that the freedom of speech and expression can be largely guaranteed. However, in reality, it seems that this is not the case. Media biases, disinformation, fake news, bigotry, etc, are filled on online social media platforms. Thus, to a very large extent, it can be observed that the gap between technological promise and reality keeps widening instead of narrowing.
Gap Keeps Widening
The way about how information is communicated to audiences has been shifted from distribution to a model of getting attention but the problem is that such attention is not evenly distributed among online users. Danah Boyd (2010, p1, paragraph 2) clearly notices that online users are no longer “passive consumer of information”. For instance, since the mid of last century, people tended to receive very similar messages and information from mainstream media channels including radio stations, newspapers, TV programs, etc. Those who controlled the means of information distribution had very significant power on influencing target audiences(Boyd, 2010, p2, paragraph 5). A totalitarian government, let say, could potentially manipulate or censor information and deliver intended messages to audiences. Zeynep Tufekci (2018, p1, paragraph 1) raises a very good example in the opening of his article. When military officers overthrew the central government and took over the regime of Turkey in 1960, they could control the media by pointing the guns at announcers throughout the football game between Turkey and Scotland(2018, p1, paragraph 2). Announcers had to broadcast political information which were favorable to the new military government. But in reality, internet makes it feasible for online users to upload their own personal contents. In other words, contents are no longer distributed by several selected media channels. Governments or other major information distributors cannot control the contents of information any longer. It seems good because nobody can actually censor or regulate information but the hidden problem is that now the media influential power is within the hands of those who can attract attention from online users. But not everyone can attract the same amount of attention on the social media platforms. Boyd (2010, p3, paragraph 6) points out that people falsely believe such attentions are distributed based on meritocracy -- only the best persons can receive more attention. In fact, it is not the case. For example, China has the largest population in the world. Chinese people, therefore, are only interested in Chinese language contents. Contents in other languages such as Dutch will be marginalized in social media. Thus, it can be observed that the gap between technological promise and reality is widening because attention has not been evenly or fairly distributed among online users.
Besides, the gap between technological hope and reality is widening simply because more fake news and disinformation will be produced in the new networked media. Tufekci (2018, p1, paragraph 8) uses a very sarcastic tone in his article, “It is a golden age of free speech -- if you can believe your lying eyes.” What Tufekci actually means is that there are too many fake contents including videos, news, photos, etc, in the online social media. Very often, people do not care or question too much about credibility or reliability of a piece of information. Information or content producers know very much about what kind of information audiences love to read the most. For instance, Boyd (2010, p4, paragraph 4) mentions that people are “addicted to gossips” for a reason. Such news or information can arose audiences’ interests and make people more networked. People who hear the same gossips can freely offer their own comments or ideas with one another regardless whether the news is true or not. In addition, during the presidential campaign in 2016, social media platforms knew exactly what audiences were really interested in. Top election news were generated in nearly 19 social media outlets to promote the discussions and audience engagement in regards to the presidential campaign (Tufekci, 2018, p2, paragraph3). However, the most dangerous part is that technology does not facilitate the freedom of expression. Instead, when people realize that the attention is more important than information distribution, they can potentially buy such attention from social media platforms. Politicians, for instance, may either pay heavily to social media platforms to advertise for their election campaign or even recruit reporters or editors to write fake news which engage target audiences and voters to discuss about the respective election candidate or attack political opponents. As a matter of fact, Tufekci (2018, p2, paragraph 2) also points out that social media platforms such as Facebook use “massive surveillance” on users’ preferences, perceptions and behaviors. Perhaps it is not so accurate to use the term, “surveillance”, but large social media companies can use analysis software to gather such data and information based on the user- generated contents such as posts, videos or photos. The user-generated contents are in fact tradable. In order to help a person or a company to get public attention, social media companies know what kind of fake news can arose audiences’ interests or meet their tastes. In this way, the gap between technological promise and reality is widening because fake news or disinformation will become a major tool for a person or an organization to get public attention. Truth or authenticity will largely be compromised.
However, to a certain extent, the gap could also be narrowed if legal actions are undertaken. Tufekci (2018, p4, paragraph 6) is convinced that Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, cannot solve the above-mentioned problems alone. Policy makers and governments, parliaments and other authoritative organizations should take the responsibility to enact laws and legal terms to regulate online privacy violation, illegal surveillance, data mining and harvesting, etc. It is highly true that human’s information society is moving toward a networked media instead of broadcasting, so there is no incentive for us to go backward. Boyd (2010, p6, paragraph) also notices that people are not just consuming gossips, fake news or disinformation from social media. Alongside, they also consume reliable news and fast information via the internet. Boyd describes the current information in the social media as “a big mess”. Thus, it can be observed that if such mess can be tidied up, the quality, reliability and credibility of information can be significantly improved. One of the possible solution, like the above-mentioned, is to implement effective measures and regulations to make the online information more organized and reliable. Besides, after knowing that attention becomes the dominant factor which influences netizens’ decision-making and reasoning processes and at the same time, such attentions are not evenly distributed among audiences, government should take prompt actions to accomplish our existing legal systems to regulate the attentions and information flow. The U.S so far has already conducted measures to fight against fake news or media. As such, the gap between the technological promise and reality can be narrowed in the future.
All in all, people should be fully aware that our information society is moving toward a networked system. Each day, bloggers, streamers, uploaders, and together with other netizens are sharing millions of user-generated contents. It seems that under this information eco-system, the freedom of speech and expression can be guaranteed because dictators or totalitarian governments cannot easily control the information flow or perform censorship on “sensitive issues”. But it should also be noticed that in this era, people who can attract public attentions have more influential power on audiences than those who can control media distribution. Very often, such attentions are not evenly distributed among netizens. In other words, a person can upload as many photos or posts as he wants on the internet. But without attentions, not too many people will watch them. To attract attentions become more important than pursuing credibility and validity of the sources of information. Fake news, rumors, disinformation, etc, are thus created to attract public attentions or engage audiences to discuss a hot topic. Marketers find social media as a highly effective tool to advertise products or brands to influence both potential and target customers. Children, for instance, who are incapable of making mature or rational decisions can be potentially influenced by social media marketing. Childhood obesity is a tangible example to show how vulnerable children are when facing social media advertising(Boyd, 2010, p3, paragraph 2). However, netizens should also not fear too much about the new technological and media trend. It is largely true that at least, the freedom of speech is guaranteed on the social media. The most important thing is to take legal actions to regulate online information and attention distribution. Without fake information, illegal data mining and surveillance, privacy violation, it is still possible that the gap between technological promise and reality can be narrowed.
Reference
Boyd, d. (2010). "Streams of Content, Limited Attention: The Flow of Information through Social Media." Web2.0 Expo. New York, NY: November 17
Tufekci, Z. (2018). It’s the (democracy-poisoning) golden age of free speech. Wired. https://www. wired. com/story/free-speech-issue-tech-turmoil-new-censorship/.