Hello there! For my post today I wanted to explore the topic of the state of who owns our digital conversations. The way that social media websites and platforms, and our uses for them, have evolved over the years has had a profound impact on society.
There are definitely both benefits and drawbacks to these ‘digital public squares’. As stated by The Yale Law Journal, “The concept of the “digital public square” is often presented as both a descriptive and a normative assessment. The doctrinal and policy consequences that flow from the analogy are significant. The digital-public-square view chiefly emphasizes the principle of openness to all people and all ideas. Accordingly, adherents of the digital-public-square perspective tend to view restrictions and regulations of online forums as antidemocratic and censorious.”
As I mentioned previously, there are definite benefits and drawbacks of these digital public squares. As shared by Make Use Of, some positive aspects of online interaction include that social media allows for immediate online discussions; that social media promotes knowledge sharing with others; it allows people to stay in touch with friends, family, and acquaintances, even if they live a great distance from one another; it helps an individual to stay informed about news events and stories; and it is a channel that allows an individual to establish and grow their personal brand, if they desire.
In contrast, there are also definite drawbacks to these spaces. Make Use Of also shared some negatives aspects of these public squares. One drawback is that social media users can experience FOMO, or “fear of missing out.” Make Use Of explains that “Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) is a phenomenon that became prominent around the same time as the rise of social media. Unsurprisingly, it’s one of the most widespread negative effects of social media on society.”
Unrealistic expectations and poor body images are also noted as some negative aspects to using social media. One of the most harmful and negative examples is the simultaneous rise of both social media conversations and cyberbullying. “Cyberbullying can take on many forms, including personal attacks, harassment or discriminatory behavior, spreading defamatory information, misrepresenting oneself online, spreading private information, social exclusion and cyberstalking” (UGA Today).
Can we depend on the goodwill of the owners of these platforms? It is hard to say.
What about decentralized spaces? “The term Web3 was coined by Gavin Wood—one of the co-founders of the Ethereum cryptocurrency—as Web 3.0 in 2014. Since then, it’s become a catch-all term for anything that has to do with the next generation of the internet being a decentralized digital infrastructure” (Pc Mag).
This theoretical shift would also pose some benefits and drawbacks. “Proponents envision Web3 as an internet that does not require us to hand over personal information to companies like Facebook and Google in order to use their services. The web would be powered by blockchain technology and artificial intelligence, with all information published on the public ledger of the blockchain. Similar to how cryptocurrency operates, everything would have to be verified by the network before being accepted. Online apps would theoretically let people exchange information or currency without a middleman. A Web3 internet would also be permissionless, meaning anyone could use it without having to generate access credentials or get permission from a provider.” (PC Mag).
I believe that a permissionless internet would pose some serious concerns, but it is unsettling to be under surveillance on a regular basis.
I recently experienced using a participatory service with editing a Wikipedia article, and it was fun and interesting to learn how collaboration works on websites that are self-policing. As stated by BBC, “Wikipedia is self-policing and relies on its community of volunteer editors to improve the quality and accuracy of the pages over time. It’s the ‘wisdom of crowds’ principle in action. Writers are encouraged to back up factual statements with verifiable references and authoritative sources as often as possible.”
If a new era of the internet could communicate and work together this way, it would have hope of being a great place for everyone.
