Deeper Down the Rabbit Hole
21/05/22 09:15
As you watch videos on social media, an algorithm designed to boost your engagement is in the background striving to determine what may interest you next.
The videos you watch, the posts you read, like, and share, or the searches you perform for a specific tag or category will result in similar content prioritized.
Algorithms also match social media users to others with similar interests and recommend posts or videos if a user with a similar profile has searched for them.
Personal data and geographic location also help predict what you want to see.
As this happens, your continued engagement is analyzed and new posts prioritized.
You may not be aware of it, but social media could be leading you deeper down the rabbit hole.
Social media algorithms encourage polarization in the pursuit of greater engagement.
With a good presentation and a few simple solutions to inflammatory issues, videos produced for echo chambers exploit this.
They may centre on anger at governments and political parties, distrust of mainstream media, anxiety over losing traditional status and privilege, fear and hatred of racial or minority groups, or conspiracy theories.
Depending on viewing habits, algorithms could be matching you with increasingly extreme content.
An equally powerful influence is from content liked or shared by someone you know or have come to trust.
Political science Professor Steward Prest, a lecturer at Simon Fraser University, says content can be persuasive when coming from your social network.
According to Professor Prest, “it suggests that it got there from somebody they consider to be a friend, so it comes from their own network, and our evidence is pretty clear that we are more likely to be convinced by evidence, by arguments that come from sources that we tend to trust.”
Prest says one aspect of a successful video is the ability to “speak directly to a community” using the language and familiar style.
A TikTok video, for instance, contains a kind of language, and the ability to use it effectively is a way to reach a particular audience.
“It's not just the fact there is a video there,” says Prest, “but it's a video that seems like it belongs, it seems like it communicates a kind of understanding of the language and then by implication the broader concerns of that kind of community.”
Prest says politicians who can appear highly sincere in videos can be very persuasive and, as an example, points to videos created by Pierre Poilievre.
The Conservative Party of Canada votes for a new leader in September, and perceived frontrunner Poilievre has used videos effectively to boost support for his campaign.
Prest says Poilievre is good at delivering his point of view to “an audience primed to consume that kind of content” in a right-of-centre social media and media landscape.
On the other side of the political spectrum, he says current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's communications team is effective, as well, at messaging, such as photographs that capture the essence of different kinds of events.
“So much so," he says, "that it's become something that the campaign was even mocked for, being too good at the photo shoot and not necessarily being substantive enough.”
Prest says it comes down to the individual politician and the ability to harness the technology.
“Poilievre's messages can really resonate on some forms of social media, and the NDP resonate elsewhere.”
He says NDP leader Jagmeet Singh has a much easier time reaching younger Canadians through his TikTok videos.
Prest says for politicians and their parties, one of the great things about social media is that just about anyone can pick it up and learn how to use it if they are willing to put in the time and effort.
He notes that politicians are more willing to seek alternative social media outlets than ten years ago.
“You will have a serving politician sitting down with a podcast and with video engagers as well, so essentially looking for any and every outlet that they think will help them get the messages that they are trying to get out to an audience that will likely be receptive to it.”
For a politician, being able to bypass the media and speak directly to potential donors and voters and for the public to get an unfiltered perspective is a positive side of social media.
The darker side is that slick use of videos can isolate people in echo chambers, creating an even more efficient filter than journalists and editors in presenting political perspectives.
The perspectives and labels used against opponents by influencers begin a process of fostering distrust and deepening animosity.
Far-right and alt-right content receives more engagement because it taps into strong primitive emotions found in issues such as national patriotism, security, the other, anger, and fear.
The extreme right is better at connecting with people on a visceral level, with right-wing populism being more engaging.
Countering this can be done through truthful narratives delivered by trusted sources in as many places as possible to vaccinate people against extremism and disinformation.
But is that an effective way to deal with increasingly vitriolic discourse?
Prest says there is no foolproof answer but suggests taking note of your reaction to a post or a story is a good start.
“If a politician has said something, or a media outlet has carried something that triggered a strong emotional reaction, that automatically should be a warning sign that somebody may be trying to persuade you of something that may not necessarily be purely true.”
He warns that stories selected to maximize an emotional or visceral reaction often attempt to persuade you by using very selective information or misinformation.
Prest suggests that if a politician says something you find outrageous, or if a media outlet publishes a story that you find hard to believe, be sure that you are comfortable with its reliability by verifying it with another source.
If you cannot, he says that is reason to question the reliability of the information and the motivation behind sharing it.
Unfortunately, people are more engaged by emotion than dry, balanced coverage.
Conservative talk radio has relied on this for decades, tabloid publishers hawk newspapers with it, and water-cooler gossips use it against others at work.
Social and political influencers exploit the need to blame others for poor outcomes by claiming people have been affected by powerful forces working against their best interests and then offering simple solutions.
Propoganda is an old game.
However, prior to social media there was no way share it as broadly and tailor it specifically to influence particular groups and individuals to promote irrational fear, distrust, and divisiveness.
The videos you watch, the posts you read, like, and share, or the searches you perform for a specific tag or category will result in similar content prioritized.
Algorithms also match social media users to others with similar interests and recommend posts or videos if a user with a similar profile has searched for them.
Personal data and geographic location also help predict what you want to see.
As this happens, your continued engagement is analyzed and new posts prioritized.
You may not be aware of it, but social media could be leading you deeper down the rabbit hole.
Social media algorithms encourage polarization in the pursuit of greater engagement.
With a good presentation and a few simple solutions to inflammatory issues, videos produced for echo chambers exploit this.
They may centre on anger at governments and political parties, distrust of mainstream media, anxiety over losing traditional status and privilege, fear and hatred of racial or minority groups, or conspiracy theories.
Depending on viewing habits, algorithms could be matching you with increasingly extreme content.
An equally powerful influence is from content liked or shared by someone you know or have come to trust.
Political science Professor Steward Prest, a lecturer at Simon Fraser University, says content can be persuasive when coming from your social network.
According to Professor Prest, “it suggests that it got there from somebody they consider to be a friend, so it comes from their own network, and our evidence is pretty clear that we are more likely to be convinced by evidence, by arguments that come from sources that we tend to trust.”
Prest says one aspect of a successful video is the ability to “speak directly to a community” using the language and familiar style.
A TikTok video, for instance, contains a kind of language, and the ability to use it effectively is a way to reach a particular audience.
“It's not just the fact there is a video there,” says Prest, “but it's a video that seems like it belongs, it seems like it communicates a kind of understanding of the language and then by implication the broader concerns of that kind of community.”
Prest says politicians who can appear highly sincere in videos can be very persuasive and, as an example, points to videos created by Pierre Poilievre.
The Conservative Party of Canada votes for a new leader in September, and perceived frontrunner Poilievre has used videos effectively to boost support for his campaign.
Prest says Poilievre is good at delivering his point of view to “an audience primed to consume that kind of content” in a right-of-centre social media and media landscape.
On the other side of the political spectrum, he says current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's communications team is effective, as well, at messaging, such as photographs that capture the essence of different kinds of events.
“So much so," he says, "that it's become something that the campaign was even mocked for, being too good at the photo shoot and not necessarily being substantive enough.”
Prest says it comes down to the individual politician and the ability to harness the technology.
“Poilievre's messages can really resonate on some forms of social media, and the NDP resonate elsewhere.”
He says NDP leader Jagmeet Singh has a much easier time reaching younger Canadians through his TikTok videos.
Prest says for politicians and their parties, one of the great things about social media is that just about anyone can pick it up and learn how to use it if they are willing to put in the time and effort.
He notes that politicians are more willing to seek alternative social media outlets than ten years ago.
“You will have a serving politician sitting down with a podcast and with video engagers as well, so essentially looking for any and every outlet that they think will help them get the messages that they are trying to get out to an audience that will likely be receptive to it.”
For a politician, being able to bypass the media and speak directly to potential donors and voters and for the public to get an unfiltered perspective is a positive side of social media.
The darker side is that slick use of videos can isolate people in echo chambers, creating an even more efficient filter than journalists and editors in presenting political perspectives.
The perspectives and labels used against opponents by influencers begin a process of fostering distrust and deepening animosity.
Far-right and alt-right content receives more engagement because it taps into strong primitive emotions found in issues such as national patriotism, security, the other, anger, and fear.
The extreme right is better at connecting with people on a visceral level, with right-wing populism being more engaging.
Countering this can be done through truthful narratives delivered by trusted sources in as many places as possible to vaccinate people against extremism and disinformation.
But is that an effective way to deal with increasingly vitriolic discourse?
Prest says there is no foolproof answer but suggests taking note of your reaction to a post or a story is a good start.
“If a politician has said something, or a media outlet has carried something that triggered a strong emotional reaction, that automatically should be a warning sign that somebody may be trying to persuade you of something that may not necessarily be purely true.”
He warns that stories selected to maximize an emotional or visceral reaction often attempt to persuade you by using very selective information or misinformation.
Prest suggests that if a politician says something you find outrageous, or if a media outlet publishes a story that you find hard to believe, be sure that you are comfortable with its reliability by verifying it with another source.
If you cannot, he says that is reason to question the reliability of the information and the motivation behind sharing it.
Unfortunately, people are more engaged by emotion than dry, balanced coverage.
Conservative talk radio has relied on this for decades, tabloid publishers hawk newspapers with it, and water-cooler gossips use it against others at work.
Social and political influencers exploit the need to blame others for poor outcomes by claiming people have been affected by powerful forces working against their best interests and then offering simple solutions.
Propoganda is an old game.
However, prior to social media there was no way share it as broadly and tailor it specifically to influence particular groups and individuals to promote irrational fear, distrust, and divisiveness.