Facing Up To Facebook

The current uproar over Facebook is much more than just a case of a breach of data security. The recent use of the platform as a political weapon raises deep philosophical questions – ones that shake the foundations of religion, economics and political democracy.

As Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg faces tough questioning from legislators, serious issues are coming to light about the company’s practices. Exactly how the company uses the massive amount of data they collect on all of us is suddenly being questioned. Although the wider role of social media is not yet being discussed, there is considerable evidence that the number of bots, paid trolls and fake accounts in Twitter and other platforms makes any information found on them to be dubious.

First of all, calling the problem a “security breach” or “theft of data” is incorrect, and most likely a red herring. We always tend to think of new technologies just like we looked at the devices they replaced. We tend to think of our private information as being sealed in these “locked” file drawers and Facebook seems to be giving out the key to private companies.

This is NOT the issue.

The real problem is the data, itself. Ever since Facebook began, it started developing a sophisticated psychological profile of EVERY USER. First, there was the basic demographic information you provided in your profile. Then there was your activity online. Everything you clicked on, liked, viewed, or purchased was being added to the database. It goes without saying that this could be VERY personal and quite revealing. The process is being ever-more-refined every day. Every time I refresh my browser, Facebook asks me some psychologically-revealing question, under the guise of letting my “friends” know me better. These are carefully chosen to reveal my fears, weaknesses, personal preferences and dislikes so that the database can be even more sophisticated.

The rationale for this, of course, was so the system could learn what you like. Many users considered it cool (and still do) that their social media platform suggests products you might be interested in or songs you might like. Many people understood this trade-off and decided that the benefits would offset whatever loss of privacy occurred. Most consumers believe (incorrectly) that they are immune to advertising, and are thus not affected by the targeted ads they are being bombarded with.

I don’t think anybody considered the fact that Facebook’s ability to target ads to influence what an individual buys could also be used to influence how an individual votes. THIS was the crime committed by Cambridge Analytica.

We know from decades of experience that advertising can be VERY effective at manipulating people’s purchasing habits. The GOP figured out that the exact same effectiveness could be achieved in manipulating who people voted for. In fact, Facebook, with more followers than Jesus, could allow them to individually tailor the propaganda showed to each voter – with scientific precision.

They knew that President Obama’s campaign had used targeted ads using Facebook demographics, but they took it one step further. They worked with the “stolen” psychological profile data to insert items into your news feed. In fact, Facebook helped them do it. There were three full-time FB employees stationed in Republican Campaign Headquarters, helping the GOP to more effectively target Democratic voters with news items designed to inflame their passions.

I think the “security breach” meme is a red herring, because the real issue is who determines what goes in your news feed. Facebook has jealously guarded the “algorithm” that determines what you see and what you don’t, but this is a crucial issue. As we rapidly approach a future where ALL information a person gets will be through their phone, the people who control what goes in your phone essentially control YOU.

If we allow political parties to control the propaganda sent to every individual voter, democracy is no longer possible. If this propaganda can be individually targeted to appeal to our fears, loves and hatreds, then “free will” is no longer possible. If free will is no longer possible, then even basic religious beliefs are now in question. I was raised a Baptist, who make a big thing of people making their own choice to follow a “savior.”

If people can be persuaded to vote for a candidate as easily as they can be persuaded to go to McDonald’s when they’re hungry, then Democracy is dead.

Consent can be manufactured.

Black people can be made to vote for a white supremacist.

Poor people can be made to vote for rich people that will make them poorer.

Women can be made to vote for a pussy-grabber.

In my opinion, this is the philosophical question of our era: If people can be easily manipulated into believing unbelievable things, can human beings be said to have “free will?”

I don’t believe that Mark Zuckerberg foresaw the existential questions his platform would someday raise. It is clear to me that his intention was just as he said at the beginning – he was trying to improve and facilitate communication between people. What he failed to recognize was how powerful this personal information could be if used against the American people, themselves.

The weaponizing of America’s largest social network by the GOP has shown us the greatest threat yet to our nation’s experiment with Democracy. Let us hope we can figure out a way to share our information without having that information used to mold us into some 1984-like pleb, fed a steady stream of questionable media by some mysterious curator.

Facebook is an amazing thing, and has increased connectivity between peoples all over the world. Never before has it been so easy to share our thoughts, images and music with our friends. At the same time, though, it has never been so easy to manipulate our thoughts and emotions. We must make sure Facebook stays a SOCIAL platform and not a benevolent Big Brother.