The role of Big Tech in shaping public opinion and the responsibility they bear

As I reflect on Meta's recent decision to tighten its hate speech policies, I'm amazed by how much Big Tech influences public opinion. According to a recent blog post, Meta, the force behind Facebook and Instagram, has taken a significant step by aiming to "remove speech targeting ‘Zionists’ in several areas where [their] process showed that the speech tends to be used to refer to Jews and Israelis with dehumanizing comparisons, calls for harm or denials of existence." For me, this decision highlights the influential role these companies play in our daily lives and the responsibility they carry to maintain a balanced and unbiased flow of information.

Are algorithms creating more harm than good?

Back in the day, newspapers and publishing houses were our main gateways to information, tailoring content to their readers' political and socio-economic leanings. Fast forward to today, and we find ourselves in a dramatically transformed landscape. Big Tech giants like Facebook, Instagram, and X (formerly Twitter) are now the principal curators of information, using sophisticated algorithms to deliver vast amounts of data to users.

This digital revolution has its pros and cons. On the upside, it makes information accessible to everyone, offering users a variety of viewpoints. However, the flip side is a bit more troubling. These algorithms often create echo chambers, amplifying existing biases and, in my view, sometimes nudging users towards extreme views. For example, a casual search on geopolitical issues can quickly spiral into overwhelming polarised content, hardening users' views without offering a well-rounded perspective.

Given their power, surely Big Tech platforms have to manage the information they distribute responsibly? Their influence on political opinions is undeniable, as seen in events like the US elections. Take, for instance, Republican strongholds like Texas or certain parts of South America, where these platforms might predominantly push content supporting Republican viewpoints. This selective content curation may not only shape political beliefs but also affect advertising revenue from those regions.

The dual-edged nature of Big Tech's capability is pretty clear. While they can enlighten, I feel they can just as easily mislead. Meta's latest policy update, aimed at curbing hate speech, is a step in the right direction. If enforced properly, it could help stem the tide of harmful and extremist rhetoric. Yet, the real test lies in the consistent and transparent application of these policies.

What’s the best approach?

Francine Berman, a professor of computer science at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, states: “The digital world we experience is a fusion of tech innovation and social controls. For cyberspace to be a force for good, it will require a societal shift in how we develop, use, and oversee tech, a reprioritization of the public interest over private profit.” My view echoes this in that we need to change how we create and control technology, focusing more on benefiting the public rather than making private profits.

In my opinion, the conversation around regulating Big Tech is far from over. Balancing free speech with responsible governance to curb misinformation is crucial, especially during pivotal moments like the recent UK election. The stakes are high, as Big Tech's influence can have profound implications for democratic processes.

One potential solution could be to reinforce traditional, regulated media outlets. In the UK, the BBC stands out as a prime example of a news organisation committed to balanced reporting under strict regulations. By promoting content from governed channels, Big Tech could help ensure that users receive reliable, unbiased information.

The future role of Big Tech in society could depend on their ability to self-regulate and adhere to stringent policies that adopt fair and balanced information broadcasting. Meta's recent actions are encouraging, but I fear there's still a long road ahead.

I’d like to see us paying closer attention to who controls the information we consume. Right now, AI and Big Tech have the power to shape the news landscape. By empowering traditional publishing companies and news channels, we could ensure the information we receive meets high standards of accuracy and balance.

I would say that journalists and established media outlets, overseen by regulatory bodies, should remain our primary news sources. As I touched on earlier, in the UK, the BBC is regulated by Ofcom, which mandates balanced reporting and enforces retractions when necessary. If Big Tech prioritises content from these reliable sources, surely we can combat the spread of hate speech and unverified information, promoting a more informed public discussion?

So, while Big Tech has revolutionised our access to information, my view is that it also bears the responsibility to ensure this information is accurate, unbiased, and free from societal harm. As we navigate this complex digital era, I feel our focus should be on balancing innovation with the principles of truth and fairness. Do you agree?