The
decision of the founder of Facebook to work with the US authorities
on the hunting of Russian hackers is a turning point in the policy of
the largest social medium on the planet. Perhaps it is the moment
that officially enters the political arena.
There are
two things that have been commonplace for White House occupants for
centuries: a long tour in all the American states before the
elections and a proclamation to the American people after their
election. Mark Zuckerberg, the creator of Facebook, did both.
In the last
year he visits all the American states, taking pictures with farmers,
workers, priests and even addicted people in a personal "election
campaign" without any opponents. And then, it was time to turn
Urbi et Orbi to the two billion "believers" who keep active
Facebook accounts.
The reason
was that the known social medium allowed the publication of paid Ads
by Russian users, supposedly aimed at influencing the outcome of the
US elections. Although initially Facebook reported that it had not
identified any suspicious action, when the pressures began to rise,
Zuckerberg said in his "statement" that he would provide
data to a congressional committee for about 3,000 related Ads posted
on his pages. Of course, as the researcher and journalist Max
Blumenthal explained, this "treasure" turned out to be coal
too.
Among the
advertisements included hundreds of irrelevant issues (even simple
pictures with puppies), while 65% of the messages were uploaded after
the US presidential elections, so, apparently, they would not had
been able to influence the final result. So, the big news was not the
content of the Ads, but the fact that Zuckerberg agreed to cooperate
with the US authorities by offering information of Facebook users - a
policy immediately followed by Google and Twitter.
For many,
the informal proclamation was an expression of "subjugation"
to the US deep state, and especially to the reborn camp of
neoconservatives, who, led by Hillary Clinton, have launched a new
witch hunt against Moscow. For others, it was just a compromise move
that proved that Zuckerberg can "swim" comfortably into the
deep waters of the American political scene.
In any case,
the incident once again brought to light the terrifying power that
Facebook has acquired in the already oligopolistic market of social
media. "Facebook users could outnumber Christians before the end
of the year" CNBC stated a few days ago - a peculiar way indeed
to explain that soon one-third of the world's inhabitants will use
Zuckerberg's platform at least once a month.
The case of
the Russian Ads, however, has triggered an even more interesting
debate. Most of those who criticized Zuckerberg's decision accused
him of interfering in the operation of the algorithms that determine
which news, Ads, and friend's messages will be viewed by each user on
his "wall". This view, however, implies that algorithms
consist a kind of objective (and mostly apolitical) mechanism.
In a sense,
as writer Franklin Foer explained in his new book, "World
Without Mind," the myth of the objective algorithm is the
contemporary expression of a technocratic concept, first appeared in
18th century Europe by writers such as Henri de Saint-Simon.
Known as the
Utopian precursor of "scientific socialism," Saint-Simon
envisioned a society in which the interests of the corrupt old regime
and the chaos that the power of "mob" might bring to the
society, would give their place to a body of technocrats engineers
who would regulate the functioning of society exclusively with
scientific criteria. Instead of philosophers in politics, or,
philosophical politicians, the new vision foresaw positions only for
engineers.
The
seemingly neutral algorithms of present era, Franklin Foer argues,
come to replace the Utopia and the myth of the first technocrats. In
fact, as he explains quite thoroughly, each algorithm hides enormous
amounts of politics and political economy too, depending on the
aspirations of its creators.
Perhaps the
next US president will be elected by an algorithm - that of Mark
Zuckerberg.
Article
by Aris Chatzistefanou, translated from the original source:
Related:
Comments
Post a Comment