What if the Hype Machine’s design wasn’t geared toward likes that give us a fleeting dopamine rush to induce us to produce more of the most popular content, but instead incentivized us to produce the most valuable, uplifting, motivating, or thought-provoking content? In a competitive market, platforms may be more likely to move from information-poor to information-rich designs, with metadata about the provenance of the content they offer, the veracity of its sources, and the context in which it is produced. Such information could go a long way toward informing our choices of what to believe and share. This is just one hypothetical example, but it stresses the importance of thinking about what we want to promote in the world. Do we really want a world dominated by popularity? (Such worlds tip toward madness and away from wisdom, as we learned.) Or would we rather promote those who uplift our spirit, enhance our knowledge, and deepen our emotional stability? The “time well spent” movement is admirable, but design alone cannot achieve its goals. Yes, we need social software designed to support the values we want to promote, but we need to advocate for those values through our own collective behavior as well. The #deletefacebook movement is an expression of that desire. Even without real alternatives, society is pushing back on the Hype Machine’s current designs. We need to lean into that feeling and back it up with action. Software code design is only one of the four levers we have at our disposal. If regulators can create and enforce competition and mitigate market failures, in privacy and speech, through laws, the environment will enable realistic choices that can lead us away from the Hype Machine’s current design. If designers think carefully about the software code that can support the values we espouse rather than the ones we are forced into today, we will have real alternatives to choose from. If we develop and enforce the norms that transform human agency into collective action, we will make those choices a reality at a societal level. If all these levers are pulled in unison to create the future we want, it will force the business models that direct the money in today’s social media economy to change, because the money follows our attention. In this way, we are the architects of our own future. We control the Hype Machine’s destiny because it depends on us for its survival. Social media is not going to be cleaned up with a simple slogan or a three-step action plan. It’s a complex system. Improving it will require a coordinated set of approaches. And because it is so new, there’s a great deal of uncertainty. One path may seem like the right approach, only to backfire and create the very outcomes we’re trying to avoid. But with a coordinated campaign of money, code, norms, and laws, I believe we can successfully adapt the Hype Machine to a brighter future that achieves its thrilling promise while avoiding its perils. As we attempt to steer social media in the right direction, we’ll need to test different approaches, guided by theory and validated by experiment. The social media platforms, the policy makers, and the people will need to work together, drawing on the data and analyses of the scientists who study social media. With the right goals, experimentation, and a little determination we can start to move in a positive direction, creating incremental victories and building something that will promote the best values of human civilization. I, for one, look forward to collaborating with the brilliant, conscientious engineers, executives, policy makers, and scientists who are working on changing the Hype Machine’s destiny. Our path to a brighter Social Age starts now.
The final passage I’ll be sharing from this book. At its essence, what the author is trying to say is that there is no quick solution to dealing with the negative effects of social media. A simple political slogan or a 3 step plan won’t cut it, due to the various incentives and stakeholders involved.
Whats needed is a series of different approaches, all proceeding at the same time where we can test and continually improve how it works. As we are constantly breaking new ground with technology, we’ll need to be cognisant that current structures and regulations in society will be left behind and be unable to cover all negative impacts of social media. What is important is that we remain open to collaboration and not get grid-locked in the argument of pursuing purist solutions like “breaking big tech” or “shutting them down”.
