During a live-streamed conversation with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Elon Musk bluntly admitted that amusement was now the primary driver for social networks.
The main goal of X, at least since he took it over, “is to maximize unregretted user time,” Musk told Netanyahu. After all, he explained, if the content is not “interesting, entertaining, and engaging, you will lose users. People will not want to use us if they find the experience unpleasant.”
Social networks are now dominated by a torrent of viral videos, memes, and addictive content that caters to our desire for amusement. Yet, despite this shift toward entertainment, they paradoxically find themselves serving as de facto news sites for millions, shaping public opinion and influencing discourse, thereby raising important questions about the impact of these platforms on disseminating information in our digital age.
Two years ago, a Pew Research Center report found that more than eight in 10 Americans get their news on digital devices – smart phones, computers, or tablets – “sometimes” or “often.” Only 7% of youth and 5% of adults said they preferred to get their news on the radio or via print.
For adults under 30, social media was the most common new source, the report revealed. Moreover, over half (53%) of Americans got at least some information from social media.
How entertainment trumped news in a bid for profit
This shift from news to entertainment started in the 1980s when “entertainment conglomerates began buying up networks and started expecting news networks to turn profits like other entertainment divisions,” explained analyst R.J. Cross in an article written for the US NGO PIRG Education Fund earlier this year. “Soon came the 24-hour news cycle and the emphasis on rapid and attention-grabbing stories. Then came the focus on pundits – journalist-esque figures designed to deliver opinions, not always facts.
“As the news industry changed, so too did people’s expectations of what news should look like.”
The transformation of social media has further accentuated these trends.
The lines between professional journalism and amateur blogging have blurred, as have the divisions between opinion pieces and factual reporting. Interweave these mixed messages with pet pictures, viral videos, and animated emojis, and you have modern media.
The more sensational or unconventional a story, the more attention it garners, a phenomenon that not only shapes public discourse but also aligns with the profit-making mechanisms of these platforms, where engagement and click-through rates drive revenue.
During their conversation, Netanyahu asked Musk if he could find ways within the confines of the First Amendment to clamp down on antisemitism and other forms of hatred on X or at least “roll it back as best you can.”
Since Musk assumed control of the platform the previous year, he has frequently faced criticism for disseminating content promoting antisemitism. This condemnation has come from various quarters, with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) being the most recent to voice concerns. The director of the ADL has specifically accused Musk of “amplifying” the messages propagated by neo-Nazis and white supremacists on the platform.
Musk, however, deflected Netanyahu’s appeal by explaining to the prime minister that with 100 million to 200 million posts on X in a day, “some of those are gonna be bad” and that “free speech does at times mean that someone you don’t like is saying something you don’t like. If you don’t have that, it’s not free speech.”
Moreover, he admitted, “You cannot police it in advance” but only “deamplify” it after the fact if it is found to be hate speech. “After” often means after these posts have received millions of impressions.
Musk changed the platform’s policies so that objectionable posts are typically not removed. Instead, their visibility is restricted, requiring users to seek them out actively if they want to view them. Musk calls this approach “freedom of speech, not freedom of reach.”
The reality, however, is slightly different.
A recent ADL and Tech Transparency Project study highlighted a concerning trend: Social networks often inadvertently amplify objectionable content through their algorithms. These platforms, including X, employ automated systems to recommend content to users, intending to prolong their time on the platform. These algorithms operate based on engagement metrics like views, likes, shares, and comments. Unfortunately, since extreme content, including antisemitism, tends to grab users’ attention, it can paradoxically receive increased visibility and reach on the platform if not removed.
Time is money.
X (then Twitter) was the sixth-most visited website in the world as of October 2022, with more than 63.7 billion monthly visits from 1.6 billion unique users, according to an article published by the digital marketing agency Hootsuite. And according to Statistica, Twitter’s ad revenue reached $6 billion last year.
Money is why, as acknowledged by Musk, a prominent businessman, the primary criterion for content on these platforms is not its potential for harm but rather its ability to drive user engagement. Musk admitted to Netanyahu that if these platforms become dominated by hatred and negativity, user engagement levels will likely decline – this would be a reason to stop hate speech.
During their discussion, Musk and Netanyahu underscored a growing concern regarding the potential scenario where machines could end up controlling humans rather than the other way around as artificial intelligence (AI) advances in sophistication. Musk succinctly encapsulated this apprehension when he posed the question “If the computer becomes smarter than the smartest person on Earth, at that point who is in charge? Is it the computers or the humans?”
It may be too late to ask this question.
The direction in which we perceive the world is already heavily influenced by social media machines’ pervasive presence and their formidable algorithms.
Rather than dwelling on who holds control, a more pivotal concern should be our capacity to foster a healthier and more inclusive world that provides these algorithms with more responsible and constructive data.
The writer is deputy CEO – strategy and innovation for The Jerusalem Post and a senior correspondent. She also co-hosts the Inside Israeli Innovation podcast.
Comments are closed.