The Rise of Social Media

The technology that goes into the Internet is straightforward and largely understood.  But the social inventions that the Internet brought out are still being understood

The problem with politics and our inexperience with the Internet is that it can be a completely dehumanizing experience. We can talk about policies and actions that can impact millions, but without seeing faces, seeing the people we are interacting with, we lose the idea that we are indeed dealing with other people.

This can make the Internet an easy target for hate. It suddenly becomes possible to give a voice to writing off people in the worst way without experiencing remorse for the words you say.  You can see this already with hate speech in forums and online communities. Creating a virtual persona with no link back to a physical person allows people to say terrible things without consequence.  It gives life to some of the more terrible aspects of humanity without needing to live in any one person.

This makes politics on the Internet a dangerous place. Every policy and every problem that our country faces impacts millions of people in different ways, yet in order to be heard, they must also be reduced to a sound byte or a tweet.  Long term solutions and effective governance needs more than that, but hate speech does not. 


Internet is still new

The Internet as a Social Technology is still an Unknown

Social media has changed how we perceive and distribute news.

Social media profit motive is tied to engagement, regardless of its factual integrity.

This means that news and information must become more shocking or rely on emotions in order to keep people engaged. 

People can be grouped into echo chambers and then fed items that increase engagement. The effect is that communities grow further apart and are told what to believe in. Instead of getting news from traditional sources, the news is delivered by family and friends, lending a personal credibility to information and making it harder to discern from misinformation.

On video and forum platforms, suggestion algorithms are designed send you more and more controversial content to keep you engaged.  This leads to viewers clicking on a catchy video, and then being recommend 5 or 10 more similar videos of varying levels of extremism. Each video can lead to more videos of varying topics and extremism, but matching ideologies.  Spend too much time at this without actively searching for alternative views and these platforms will give you the impression that these opinions and views have a larger representation in the real world than they actually do.

In addition, there is little to no perspectives on many of the people that are presenting their views. The same expert can present their findings in video after video as they make the rounds on YouTube, and this can lead to people thinking that this expert is at the top of their field.  But in keeping with the how social media operates, there is just as much of a chance that the expert is on the fringe and that the views being presented are not accepted in their field.  The popularity of their work may simply be a function of unfamiliarity and being adept at social media. How often is the alternative or competing opinion given?  If there is one, is the person presenting just as charismatic as the expert that is being promoted?

These trappings make social media an force multiplier that, if used incorrectly, can drastically mislead the people and cause damage to our Democracy.

Social Media has changed News

Unlike with traditional print media, the Internet is always on and always providing more and more content on everything you can imagine.

The problem is, rules and recommendations regarding the usage of the Internet were late to be established.  No one really knew what kind of long term consequences there would be to long term use to the screen and to the Internet.  Only recently has there been an increasing amount of evidence of a connection between screen time and childhood development.  During the teenager years, the Internet can multiply feelings of isolation and bullying, which has shown to have devastating consequences in schools.

And for adults, the Internet can be a place that can convince anyone of anything if they let it.  It can be an echo chamber that leads to extremism far faster than at any other point in history.  

Endless Content

The Internet and Social Media have allowed humanity to connect with each other like never before. But this interaction has come at a cost that is only just becoming apparent.

On the Internet, our connections with each other are not in person or face-to-face.  They are through virtual identities on social media posts, tweets, and message boards.  These virtual interactions may not carry any weight that a real human being is behind them (and sometimes, there isn't one). The result is that our brains literally do not see the people we are interacting with as fellow human beings.

This makes it easier to dehumanize people. When someone writes something hateful, they don't see the results on other people.

This effect certainly isn't specific to the Internet. Its been going on for as long as humanity has existed. The Internet's impact is its global reach.  Never before have so many people been connected like this before.  This includes groups of people who have less than equitable views on humans. 

The Internet Dehumanizes

The only way to get noticed is to make more extremist statements.

Talking about good policy decisions that can save social security in 8 years is boring.  Talking about the latest scandal or problem and who to blame is good TV

Trending Towards Extremism

Our online personas do not seem to follow the same conventions as an in-person conversation, especially when you consider debates on social media.  

Its possible that in your debates, you are debating multiple people, none of which will feel like they are debating in good faith or take your points at all.  It may not even be possible to determine if you are debating with people or bots/foreign actors who are attempting to influence you.

When you have a conversation in person, there's an implicit understanding between people. The ideas and opinions are attributed to the person speaking them and are responsible for them.

Our online personas do not directly link back to us in many cases. In some cases you cannot verify that the person you are talking to belongs to the person in real life, or that you are talking to a sophisticated bot.  This allows people to take liberties online that you wouldn't otherwise.


Understanding Online Debate

Before the Internet, its was difficult to associate with people who have similar ideas.  If the ideas were outlandish, then the fear of being a social outcast would often suppress those ideas.

Those days appear to be over with the Internet, a location that provides for infinite room for every idea we can come up.

This can prove both beneficial and detrimental for society.  Connecting groups of people together can lead to new ideas and inventions, or solve problems that individuals may have had issues with. 

For conspiracy theories, the Internet has been amazing as well.  That fear of being a social outcast is eliminated, replaced instead with new connections that reinforce these theories.  In addition, the sudden surge of new people interacting and supporting these theories helps grant legitimacy to these theories without ever providing evidence.  

Choose Your Reality

The Internet Allows You to Believe Anything

Before the Internet, news came through print, TV, or the radio.  The requirements to start a new news agency was very high, and so the profit motive of existing news agencies was based on reputation.  This required accuracy in reporting, and if mistakes were made, there could be serious consequences to that companies bottom line as people could switch to a different established news agency.

Now, the barriers to starting a new news website or podcast are almost non-existent in comparison, to say nothing of social media in general.  With a sudden increase in competition, this new flood of Internet news providers and their surge of popularity at the expense of traditional media news, the profit motive of news in general has changed as well.  The new profit motive is now clicks onto webpages, and the most effective method to do so is not with accuracy, but with shock and awe.

## Social Media Feeds and Podcasts only go in one direction

When traditional media made a mistake, it required a retraction from the offending news agency.  Failure to do so would allow for competing news agencies to look more reliable, drawing more subscribers and attracting more advertising revenue.  

In today's Internet news age, retractions are not necessary as accidental or intentional misinformation can simply be deleted.  It is extremely difficult at present to determine the accuracy and reliability of any source on the Internet.  Stories can get published and deleted with very little in the way of consequences to reputation.  And in this highly polarized world we currently live in, people tend to be more forgiving of mistakes if they are remembered at all.  With the cycle and amount of content people put out, its too easy to establish and push narratives despite the fact that the stories that they are founded on have been found to be not true or simply were fabrications in the first place.  

In short, people can choose whatever story they want to believe in regarding what's happening in the world today.  And its entirely possible that the story they choose has almost nothing to do with reality.

Misinformation and Bad information is not punished

If you wanted to believe, there was an incredible amount of people claiming that the 2020 election was stolen, with everyone claiming that there was evidence everywhere.

# Creating a Smoke Screen

None of the evidence turned out to be admissible in court, or stood up to scrutiny if you looked closely.  But by the time people started to look, another theory, more "evidence", and people moved on.  Coupled with an emotionally charged election and disappointment in results, this constant stream of false information poisoned millions of people.  Even if people fought back against the misinformation, the faithful had been exposed to so much of this smoke that even if some of it turned out false, they were convinced that there really was a fire.

With so much misinformation about the election out there, it gave people who's voices had credibility cover to try and continue this narrative for their own gains, further increasing the amount of smoke.  Few if any people suffered repercussions of any kind for continuing this machine. 

smoke-screen-misinformation

There's No Fire, There's a Smoke Screen

# It has never been easier for a foreign government to influence you.

In the past, news and information was restricted to print media, TV, and radio.  In these spaces, it was difficult for new outlets to show up and have the same impact as what we now call the "traditional media".  Every media outlet had gatekeepers to ensure that the news that went out to the public was reliable.  

## With the Internet, those days are gone.

The requirements for creating your own newscast, blog, social media influencer page, etc. has decreased dramatically and the number of places you can get news and information is now essentially infinite.

## Meaning - Anyone, Anywhere, Can Influence You

There are already articles highlighting how foreign countries may have already attempted or been successful at manipulating our elections by framing the news and presenting information (real and fake).

## Misinformation Laundering

In order for any misinformation to have an effect, there has to be some presumption of trust from the source that any information is genuine.  Normally, this would be done through news sources whose revenue was tied to their reputations, or from people you knew.  However, trust in traditional news sources have fallen, revenue became dependent on clicks, and the Internet has allowed several new news sources to start giving people information.  Social media and news sharing has also provided the ability to legitimize information through relatives and acquaintances.  This situation has set the stage to make it easy to "launder" information, to make news look as legitimate as possible for a target population.

# Russian Disinformation Campaign

After the Cold War, the West was the dominant economic and military power.  Russia was unable to stand up directly to the West like it once had.  But as mentioned above, it has never been easier to directly influence the people of a foreign country.

## 2016 attempts

Russia began attempting more sophisticated methods of targeting Americans during the 2016 presidential campaign.  [1]

## Biden Impeachment Hearings

Attempts at impeaching President Biden in 2024 were largely based on testimony of an FBI informant, Alexander Smirnov.  However, it was discovered that the story that Smirnov had told was a fabrication and that Smirnov was provided this story by Russian officials. [2]

## Ukraine Aid and Politicians Influenced

In 2023, stories began circulating the Internet implicating high level officials, even President Zelenskyy, of using foreign aid intended to fight Russia to enrich themselves.  In one such story, it was rumored that President Zelenskyy used funds to buy luxury yachts as a sort of getaway vehicle.  This story never found its way past YouTube and social media and was debunked quickly afterwards.  Instead of issuing retractions or clarifications, these outlets simply deleted their videos.  This represents the dangers of getting information in the 21st Century, as any viewers who saw the initial videos and left with the impression of corruption in Ukraine may never be corrected.

However, it became bigger news when a US Congressperson retweeted this faked news story from a Russian-controlled media outlet. [3]

## 2024 attempts

On September 4th, 2024, the Department of Justice charged two Russian nationals of funding an online content creation outlet in the US, known as Tenet Media using $10 million dollars that were funneled from various foreign sources.  The Justice Department alleges that this company contracted existing US influencers to publish with themes consistent with Russian aims of destabilizing the United States.  This scheme is part of a larger effort by RT, a Russian state-controlled media outlet, to create an "entire empire of covert projects" designed to shape public opinion in "Western audiences". [4}

On September 8th, 2024, the Department of Justice addressed the scope of the disinformation campaign by Russia targeting Americans through a campaign known as "Doppelganger".  This operation used AI to generate news sites that impersonate legitimate news sites in order to spread disinformation. The operation also purchased social media ads and created fake social media personas to advertise these headlines to increase the chances of exposure.  Another arm of this operation was to build a network of "independent" journalists and media outlets to spread Russian propaganda.[5]  

## Not just America

European media outlets such as Reuters, Der Spiegel, Bild, Le Monde, Le Parisien, Welt, FAZ, Süddeutsche Zeitung, Delfi and others were also being spoofed by this Russian operation. The goal of the operation was to drive a wedge between America and Europe and undermine any support for Ukraine.[6]  

In addition to influencing Europe's relationship with America, Russian disinformation campaigns have attempted to directly influence the results of elections in a multitude of countries in the EU.  The "Doppleganger" operation has been used in European elections to spread disinformation through social media under the guise of a legitimate news agency. In addition to the falsified news organizations, Russian agents are attempting to buy off influencers and politicians to spread pro-Russian messages.[7]

Outsider Influences

Internet is still an Unknown

The Threat of Political Parties

Money in Politics

Understanding the Limits of Power

The Limits of Power

The Changing News Media 

There are FCC regulations that prevent any one company from owning all of the television and newspaper outlets. The rules are designed to prevent any single entity from taking over all of the airwaves and newspapers and dictating what people could see, hear and read.  

However, the rules surrounding these FCC regulations have been continually relaxed.  In 1985, a single company could own only 25% of a given market.  That percentage is now 45% after changes were made in 2003. [1]  This has led to independent stations and newspapers being eaten through mergers with the large corporations.  This had led to fewer viewpoints available for everyone, and has concentrated control and power of media moguls.  In one example, in 2018, the Sinclair Broadcast group had several local news outlets reading the same promotional script that sounded like pro-Trump propaganda. [2]

New Deal Party

Surviving Democracy in the 21st Century

We need better tools to deal with American Politics in the 21st Century

Democracy Under Threat

The Rise of Social Media

The Threat of Political Parties

The Changing News Media

Extremism Rising Around the World

Handling Politics in the 21st Century

Rising Misinformation