Thread by @stevebosserman

Social media platforms apply sophisticated algorithms to capture / hold user attention with targeted content paid for by platform customers. For this platform owners accrue wealth, customers increase the odds of success, and users risk going down a rabbit hole of media addiction.

Genetic algorithms based on game theory principles increase the time users focus attention on social media platform content and anticipate their behavior. What incentives could algorithms employ that would prompt users to successfully address wicked problems in their communities?

Customers and owners of social media platforms profit from the non-compensated time users dedicate to interacting with content made available through the influence of algorithms. How much more value would users generate if they received compensation for platform interaction time?

The Netflix documentary The Social Dilemma imdb.com/title/tt114648… shows how social media platforms enrich their owners by enticing users to interact with platform content promoted by those without moral compass who act illegally, destroy institutions and destabilize governments.

In “Why is the world going to hell? Netflix’s The Social Dilemma tells only half the story” jonathan-cook.net/blog/2020-09-2… Jonathan Cook concludes:
“The Social Dilemma offers us an opportunity to sense the ugly, psychopathic face shielding behind the mask of social media’s affability.”

Also, “But for those watching carefully the film offers more: a chance to grasp the pathology of the system itself that pushed these destructive social media giants into our lives.” But why couldn’t 3 billion users appropriate the same social media platforms to change the system?

A key point identified by the lead-in to Michelle Gao’s article, “Popular Netflix movie ‘The Social Dilemma’ slams social media but offers few solutions” cnbc.com/2020/09/21/net… warrants thoughtful consideration.

““The Social Dilemma,” a new Netflix documentary-drama on how technology companies have manipulated human psychology with dire consequences for our society, is unlikely to impact these businesses’ bottom lines.”

Perhaps the bottom lines for social media companies could be positively impacted by incentivizing billions of users to problem solve major social, economic, and environmental issues on a massive scale as a variation on the approach proposed by @mgreeley.

https://twitter.com/mgreeley/status/1310085663161683969

“The Social Dilemma Fails to Tackle the Real Issues in Tech” slate.com/technology/202… by Pranav Malhotra writes: “
“…it informs a wide audience about issues like surveillance, persuasive design practices…, which may encourage them to hold big technology companies accountable.

“But who gets to convey this information and how it is framed are also crucial. Amplifying voices who have always had a seat at the table and continuing to ignore those who haven’t will not lead us any closer to resolving the dilemma the film claims to present.”

Why hold the viewing audience for the documentary—in the millions—responsible to resolve the dilemma when its the platform users—in the billions and includes those without “a seat at the table”—who have the greater capacity and vested interest to take on the system and change it?