In the best tradition of economists, I think "it depends".
The instances in which social media have been of benefit to democracy
are generally those in which information is tightly controlled by
governments; the official media often peddle information that may be
misleading or false, more propaganda than news. Here people have learned
to be skeptical so they are better prepared to filter out fake news.
Social media become a channel for ‘good’ information.
In democracies with a robust free press, many have become complacent and
aren’t equipped with the instincts to sniff out fake news. The success
of right wing talk radio and Fox news are testament to this societal
weakness. In seemingly well-functioning democracies, truth telling has
been taken for granted. There is no need to view social media platforms
as tools for disseminating truth; they are entertainment, and pranks and
conspiracy theories are their fare.
The metaphor of an echo chamber is often invoked when discussing social
media. I suggest an alternative – a lens. It brings some things into
sharper focus. Where there is a single unifying goal such as the search
for an alternative to oppression and miss-rule, social media focuses
attention on that goal. Where there is marked division, whether it be
black vs. white, left vs. right, social conservative vs. liberal,
focusing on these exacerbates the stark contrasts in positions, while
domains of agreement are under served and ultimately ignored.
So, social media are useful where the press is not free and probably
harmful where it is. Thus, to the extent that government control of
traditional media goes hand in hand with illiberal, undemocratic
regimes, then social media do threaten democracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment