Initially, social media was seen as a great equaliser by providing all users a platform through which to engage others. However, in recent years, we have seen a growing loss of fundamental freedoms online. Here, we outline three ways in which our choices on social media are being controlled.

 

In today’s age, there are very few of us who do not have a social media account. In fact, many of us are juggling several, and are continually keeping an eye on what the next big thing might be.

In the earlier days of social media, the emphasis was on connections: being able to stay connected with family and friends, and to share moments of your lives with each other. Now, it has become a platform, where everyone has a voice and has a community, thereby levelling what traditionally had been an uneven playing field. Moreover, and depending on the size of an individual’s community on social media, there is now scope to leverage that potential influence into an income.

However, and thanks to Cambridge Analytica scandal, we all began to become aware of the darker side to social media, including but not limited to the intensive data mining of our posts and preferences, as well as the overt and covert manipulation of our attitudes and behaviour that has been occurring.

Although much of the public attention on the less-than-stellar aspects of social media seemed to have reached its height in 2016, following the United States presidential elections, according to the 2019 Freedom on the Net Report, Internet freedom, particularly on the social media has been steadily declining. The report is published by Freedom House, an “independent watchdog organisation dedicated to the expansion of freedom and democracy around the world” (Source:  Freedom House). For its latest report, the organisation surveyed 69 countries worldwide, and based on the results noted that

…While social media have at times served as a level playing field for civic discussion, they are now tilting dangerously toward illiberalism, exposing citizens to an unprecedented crackdown on their fundamental freedoms. Moreover, a startling variety of governments are deploying advanced tools to identify and monitor users on an immense scale. As a result of these trends, global internet freedom declined for the ninth consecutive year in 2019.

(Source:  Freedom House)

In the Caribbean region, the trends have been recorded globally might not yet be as acute. However, there appears to be growing evidence that, to some degree, and through social media, our freedom – specifically our freedom of choice. – is being encroached. Below, we outline three scenarios through which we believe our freedom of choice is being affected.

 

1.  Politicking and voting

Over the past three to five years, social media has become a preferred platform for political campaigning. It has been a cost-effective way to promote candidates and political parties, and to message to prospective voters. However, in recent times, it appears that the political stakes have become higher, and imperative to win at virtually all costs has become the norm. As a result, some Caribbean countries have sought to use social media to covertly influence the choices and behaviour of prospective voters, and to also disseminate what could be construed as ‘fake news’ or disinformation.

Although within the context of politics and the effort to try to win the support of voters such efforts might be considered ‘par for the course’, a major source of contention is its intrusiveness, as there tends to be considerable data mining of the social media users’ accounts. Consequently, there are questions on the degree to which an individual’s right to privacy is being breached, plus the degree of manipulation of the messaging that occurs.

 

2.  Controlling the narrative

In a similar vein, and noting that social media gives individuals a platform from which to share their own views, there appears to be a growing trend by policymakers to seek to discredit the Press and to point the public to their social media pages as the more authoritative sources. Earlier this month, Prime Minister Andrew Holness of Jamaica, was reported to have made statements that effectively sought to ‘erode trust’ in traditional media, by asserting that the media “can take whatever stance they want to take …. it doesn’t have to be the truth. It doesn’t have to relate to the facts, it’s their opinion” (Source: Jamaica Observer). Instead, he recommended that his web and social media pages, along with those of his political party, among others, are better resources.

Jamaica has had a long tradition of the Freedom of the Press. Over the years, it has been a powerful medium to inform the public on happenings in the country, which in turn has been the impetus for public outrage on particular issues, and for changes and improvements to eventuate. Hence, while some of the reports might be opinion-based, most of them aim to be fact-based, and to be accurate. For those that are opinion-based, typically, they are highlighted as such.

However, in circumstances where public opinion might be critical of the shenanigans of public officials, frequently, the politicians become hostile to the Press, as the latter is the channel through which the public knows about those activities. In response, and similar to what has been happening in the United States, where the White House has stopped holding regular press briefings, and the President is using his Twitter account to communicate to the populace, increasingly, one might find that other politicians, including those in the Caribbean, also aim to control the narrative.

 

3.  Advertising and access control

Finally, and in order to leverage their subscriber base, many social media platforms have been relying on advertising as their primary source of revenue. As a result, the access that subscribers used to have to their network of friends or followers, has eroded considerably over the years. This is especially the case for business accounts, where for example, a post would now be viewed by less than 10% of their network. To increase their reach, they need to pay.

However, in limiting the reach to a subscriber’s network, inherently, platforms are controlling the information that users are able to view, which effectively has eroded the democratic nature of social media. Essentially, the levelling of the playing field that had been one of social media’s greatest strengths is being undermined by the control and manipulation platform owners can exert for their own gain.

 

 

Image credit:  Mike Corbett (flickr)