01 logo

Trash Algorithm or Trash People

Are the Algorithm Overlords trying to divide us or do people have more to do with it?

By Art School Dropout Published 4 years ago 12 min read
1

So within the last year or so I have been hearing a lot of talk about people being manipulated by algorithms. There are stories about YouTube's algorithm making it harder and harder to see the content you want, or censorship on twitter through machine learning code. These are obviously problems with the reliance of algorithm's to run all these platforms and we should definitely find solutions in the power of tech in our lives. Sometimes though there are some takes on algorithms that rub me the wrong way. Today the thing I want to explore is the idea that social media algorithms peddle outrage and fear. I'm going to stick with Facebook because I've used it more than others and I don't think anyone wants to read about my observations of all algorithm based sites.

It starts with boredom

For most people, you check social media when nothing better is available. Facebook does seem to be a good place to go to find what stupidity is being spread across the world. It's readily available on any device you may have at hand and is pretty convenient to use when you want to avoid human contact. In no time though, you find yourself stuck in a black hole of scrolling past all the vacation photos, social updates and current events. Next thing you know you realize that you never accomplished anything with your life... I mean your day.

So first I would like to let you know what my Facebook habits are to give you a baseline of what I see when I waste a day on Facebook. I would probably be considered a Facebook lurker, I use it just to keep tabs on people and see what's going on in their lives. I don't really interact with people, mainly, if I wanted to talk to someone about what they posted I would reach out to them privately. Even with these habits I would spend too much time just scrolling through all this void screaming. So earlier this year I removed social media apps from my phone and would only access from a computer which cut my screen time tremendously. The problem was though that when I would check my feed I would find my self just scrolling and scrolling for hours still. For me, my feed would be filled with call outs, boycotts, and just drama bullshit. My feed would outrage even though the most engagement they would get out of me was clicking on a post to read an article or to read through the comments. So it's obvious to me that Facebook at least has an over abundance of outrage, but why? Is the algorithm model that Facebook uses the problem or is it outside factors that uses the system to their benefit?

Now as far as I can assume there are different algorithms for different functions. The sponsored posts and advertising doesn't run on the same criteria as the share economy of the site. My personal feed will be filled with posts of acquaintances screaming and sharing all sorts of things that bother them and add their two cents to, but the sponsored posts I would get would be things like crafts, life-hacks or ads trying to get me to spend money. So when I get pissed off from a few hours of Facebook browsing I don't get angry with Facebook, I get irritated at the people who have too much time on their hands and share fake news and shallow hot takes non-stop. Then I get disappointed in myself for wasting so much time looking over my feed rather than wash the pile of dishes I still hadn't gotten to. My usage of Facebook usually ends in negativity but it I keep coming back. I may not come back as often but I still stay awhile whenever I do.

By John Schnobrich on Unsplash

So why do sites use these models?

With current advertising based models for websites, engagement is what makes the system churn. The longer you keep eyes on your page the more attention adverts can get. There's nothing new there but there seems to be a problem with this when a social media site leaves this process up to code. You hear this about YouTube and it's dangerous "Rabbit Hole Effect." Facebook made an algorithm to give you a feed based on interest and relevance. It monitors you and whatever you interact with on the site and does what it can to give you more of it. From everything I've looked into how this type of system works it seems to be mainly just a pattern parser. Simply put, it takes your browsing habits as inputs, measures it across whatever criteria they find helpful and then outputs other content that matches what you like. If there is anything to be concerned about it's how and where Facebook collects your inputs.

By Austin Distel on Unsplash

The Social Media Economy

So at this point I'm going to separate the three entities at play here. There is Facebook as the platform, friends and family (From this point on noted as Sharers), and Content Creators who make shareable content for Facebook for money or fame. What I witness on Facebook is the site takes what Sharers want to say and places it on my wall based on my inputs. The problem is what Sharers put out there on the platform. Majority of the posts I see whether on my wall or going to someone's specific profile is from Content Creators. Most people don't type up how they feel about things, they share memes and articles made by someone else with their own shallow two cents possibly added. In many cases it's hard to tell if they actually consumed the content or just glanced at it. Many of the Content Creators will create Facebook accounts that work very similarly to Sharers. They make it look like they are everybody else and maybe put a link to a third party site. This is the economy of social media. Someone (usually paid to) puts out content onto the platform and then sharers spread it around because it's easier than expressing your own opinions about something you thought about that day. All this while advertisements are always visible on the screen hoping you get interested in those.

When Facebook used reverse chronological order, users may have to scroll through a days worth of posts to catch up on the what they missed. After awhile you can get bored and leave the site to actually do something with your life. So Facebook implemented their content-dispersing algorithm to make sure you are constantly having something interesting in front of you. I don't know how many times I will say okay after reading this conversation I'm going to go do something, to only then see the next post is even more ridiculous than the one before and I still keep going. Same reason why the site auto-loads instead of making you flip through pages.

Why then is my feed outrage and cat videos?

By Makhmutova Dina on Unsplash

First off cats get free reign on the internet because they are awesome adorable killing machines, but to move on. Now that we've discussed how information navigates Facebook why does it seem to have a majority of outrage. Well the first thing is Facebook doesn't allow overtly sexual content really. So the next best thing to sell for attention is emotions. Negative emotions specifically due to people's natural negativity bias. Simply put this just means that negative stimulus sticks in our brains more than a positive one. It is my understanding that we operate with this bias because we evolved with the sense that something negative can be a threat to survival. So our brains focuses more energy on it to attempt to keep us out of danger. Nowadays we don't come across as many survival threatening stimuli but the tendency sticks with us today for all the little things. This is why that meme that points out that thing that gets under your skin may get a comment, while your friend's baby picture may get a like if you don't just look and scroll past.

This tendency then tells Facebook that the content you like is the content that pisses you off and so it finds more, usually from the same people who shared the content you engaged with. Now does the Facebook algorithm know what that content is in detail? No, it just knows that you left a comment on a post about LGBTQ issues then matches the tags of something else a friend posted. Sure with a big enough web of content it becomes easy to tell where you stand on the issues but the algorithm doesn't care. The algorithm isn't creating these hot takes to specifically keep you engaged to keep you wired in. It's just tracking your activity and continuing the pattern with content it can find on the platform already.

By Aarón Blanco Tejedor on Unsplash

So if Facebook isn't pissing me off, who is?

Now there are organizations that know how to use your negativity bias against you. The Content Creators. Many of them are news outlets, blogs, and online personalities, and that's usually where I see this narrative that the algorithm is what breeds the fear and outrage comes from. Most of these companies have analytics that have informed them that outrage sells. They load their articles with buzzwords that trigger reactions from their readers and then rely on the fact that people don't make their own ideas to get their pieces spread across the web. So to me it looks more like these Content Creators are manipulating the algorithm while everyone is talking about how the algorithm manipulates us. Next time you are checking out a piece of shared content, keep an eye out for unnecessary information. Sometimes they will add information that will have nothing to do with the facts. One prime example of this is when PewdiePie got married. The facts of the event are the who, why, when and where of Felix having a life moment with his friends and family, but many outlets felt the need to remind its readers of the controversies that Pewdiepie has found himself over the years. Those controversies had no weight on the wedding. It's not like Marzia fell in love Felix because of what he said on that bridge on September 10th, 2017.

If they are not adding information unrelated to the story they are telling, they will add emotional words to sway a reader before they have the information. How many times have you read about someone doing or saying a horrendous thing before knowing what they said? Before you are able to apply your own judgment you are already told how to feel about it. If you agree with the Content Creator you are then angry at what was said and if you saw nothing wrong with what was said you are now feeling attacked for sharing the same opinion. These tactics are what in my opinion keep the outrage burning and what people call the Culture War or the Outrage Industry rolling along.

These Content Creators also pick an audience they want and push their confirmation biases on. When was the last time you saw an organization that just reports on facts? One important factor of marketing is picking your demographic. This is even more relevant now with all the choices consumers have in content. For example the news used to look very different when everyone only had the network television news show to keep up with. Now there are so many avenues to pick an outlet based on personal confirmation bias. This concept doesn't just apply to outrage content, but if you make content for a specific group you will find more growth than just trying to make something for everyone. So it makes sense as a business to constantly hit the same points over and over to bring in the same type people. Is there anything wrong with that inherently? Not necessarily, having a nerd channel that wants to talk about new Nintendo releases isn't a problem because Nintendo is going to continue releases new games. They don't need to cover Playstation or Xbox releases to catch everyone. There is new information with each Nintendo release. With these outrage markets though, they will try to fit the same buzzwords into stories to play to the demographic. Even if it's a slow news week they can say the same thing over and over. Hence why when Felix Kjellberg gets married in August 2019 they have to add his controversial past from 2 years ago.

By Shane Aldendorff on Unsplash

So how's this come together.

There is only one reason these Content Creators would use these tactics.... it works. I think there can be an argument made that people don't have enough struggles or worries in their lives so they go out looking for things to rile themselves up for theatrics. The theatrics help them feel connected to others online. They find a group of people and prove the fit in with what they share. So they always go to their preferred site. Then they go to social media sites like Facebook to share what they find for points from their in-group. These Content Creators are just giving fodder for the virtue points. So what you have is a system where Content Creators create their content to fulfill the Sharer's need to be heard and validated, then the Sharer use their social platform of choice to spread the content around to feel better about themselves. Then all users interact with the shared content which tells Facebook to give them more. Then the Content Creators continue to run outrage so they can make more money. So if the users stopped buying into the manipulative works of the Content Creators the cycle would be severed. Then the Content Creators would create new things to get the attention of people, and whatever the new category of content that gets share would then be fed to you from Facebook's algorithm. So maybe we can talk start talking about how it's the people that keep this cycle running instead of trying to offload the blame away from ourselves. It's the same argument George Carlin made about politicians in his ”Back in Town” special. It's garbage in and garbage out. If you keep sharing garbage on social media the algorithm is going to give you garbage back. Facebook doesn't get this content from anywhere special, it comes from normal people. So instead of blaming your newsfeed on Facebook's content algorithm, maybe you should blame the people (including yourself) who keep outrage machine churning.

Facebook is not perfect, but going after the algorithm over what your friends and family won't shut up about is like watching someone make all the wrong decisions in a choose your own adventure game and blaming the game code for a shitty experience.

social media
1

About the Creator

Art School Dropout

Reader insights

Be the first to share your insights about this piece.

How does it work?

Add your insights

Comments

There are no comments for this story

Be the first to respond and start the conversation.

Sign in to comment

    Find us on social media

    Miscellaneous links

    • Explore
    • Contact
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Support

    © 2024 Creatd, Inc. All Rights Reserved.