Tag Archives: social media

AI and the collapse of a shared reality

TikTok has introduced me to some very interesting content creators. One such person is Morten Rand-Hendriksen, who goes by the username @mor10web.

He shared this insight recently:

@mor10web

#AI image generation, the destruction of our shared perception of reality, and the inevitable collapse of democracy. Inspired by posts on the same topic from @Paige | AI Ethicist

♬ original sound – The Mor10 of the Web

After discussing the fact that people stuck in an echo chamber of like-minded people start to call a real photograph an AI generated fake… he says,

“Here’s what keeps me up at night: We’re converging on a point where it is easier to claim that real images are fake than it is to prove that images are generated using AI, or manipulated using AI. And that means we have no reasonable expectation of any image or any video or any audio being real. And we don’t have the tools or the media literacy to really do this analysis.

…and we are in the situation we’re in now where people can choose their own reality and live in a reality dysfunction. And AI provides the tools and capabilities to make that reality disfunction into our lived reality.”

Indeed, our shared reality has collapsed. AI generated fakes spread like wildfire through echo chambers of like-minded groups, and even when discovered to be fake, there is no effort to make corrections if the fake fits the group’s narrative… and any real media that doesn’t fit that same reality is easily dismissed as a fake.

Maya Angelou said, “We are more alike, my friends, than we unalike.” I would agree with that when we had a common shared reality, but I question it now in a world filled with AI generated fakes, and a lack of media savviness to determine what really is real. The collapse of a shared reality is a threat to our world, whether the split is socioeconomic, political, or religious. We are increasingly growing unalike.

Manufacturing Beliefs

“The mass media serve as a system for communicating messages and symbols to the general populace. It is their function to amuse, entertain, and inform, and to inculcate individuals with the values, beliefs, and codes of behavior that will integrate them into the institutional structures of the larger society. In a world of concentrated wealth and major conflicts of class interest, to fulfill this role requires systematic propaganda.”

~ Edward Herman & Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent, 1988

Embrace yourself. We are in for a whirlwind of propaganda directed to both sway and embolden our beliefs. We will need to question the sources of our information. We will need to understand where the bias of the message is coming from. We will need to fact check for reliability, accuracy, and exaggeration.

We will be entertained. We will be angered. We will be emboldened. We will be ridiculed by those who disagree with us. And we will be the ones ridiculing others who hold different beliefs than us. Systematic propaganda will slowly lead us to more polarized views.

This is not a test of your emergency broadcasting system. This is also not an emergency. No, it is the emergence of political propaganda in a post Truth era. Find your own truth, fabricate your own truth. Because the media outlets you believed you believed in are not the ones in existence today… and they do not transmit Truth.

Marshall McLuhan was correct, ‘the medium is the message’, and the medium is designed not to inform but to entertain; to excite; to anger; to draw attention, clicks, and eyes on advertising. No, not to inform, to trick you. Sway your opinion, and lie to you.

Are your beliefs your own or have they been manufactured, manipulated, and swayed by the media you watch? Will you be able to answer that question as convincingly a year from now? Will your beliefs be yours or will they be governed by the propaganda you choose to watch and believe in? Be warned, the answer to that question might not be the answer you currently believe.

With a Discerning Eye

Yesterday, when I wrote ‘The inverted political bell curve’ about how politically many people have moved to the extremes. I ended by saying, “The bell curve is gone, only warring tribes remain, and the fighting is just going to get uglier.”

There are many reasons why I think this is true, and I think we are headed into a period before the US election where truth will be hard to discern, and extremist views will go viral. But I also think that many people can see it coming and will be ready. They will question, they will fact check, they will doubt the accuracy of what’s being spewed their way.

Will the extremes be loud, and will their messages be filled with personal attacks and un-researched facts that are actually fiction and propaganda? Yes.

But not everyone is going to listen. There are some savvy people who will be watching with a discerning eye. They will be the voices of reason. They will be as interested in determining the intent of the message as they will be in listening to it. They will hear something bad about a candidate they dislike, and still question the validity of what’s being said.

I don’t think this group will be a majority, but they will be present. And while yesterday I sounded like I saw a future of doom and gloom ahead of us, I also see some promise that not everyone is polarized and sitting on the extremes. And that keeps me hopeful that things might not get as messy as they could.

Watch the news and messaging on social media with a discerning eye in the coming months… question, fact check, and take the time to understand the context of things being quoted. We need common sense to prevail.

The inverted political bell curve

We no longer have an opportunity to be centrist. Extremes on either side make this challenging. Being centrist is too hard, hated by both sides because if you aren’t way over here on ‘our’ side, you lack the merit of being associated with ‘us’, so you belong with ‘them’. Rather than being seen as partial to common interests you are lumped in with everyone else that is not on ‘our’ extreme.

Examples: Liberal minded but worry about immigration? Well you may as well be fully right wing conservative. Believe in equal opportunities for gay marriage? Well then you might as well be a bleeding heart liberal, no matter how else your views may be conservative.

There used to be a bell curve where most people were not on the extremes, rather more centrist, more in the middle. That curve has inverted and flattened. Less people are ‘in the middle’ and more people are veering to the extremes. And it’s not getting any better because any political candidate who appeals to the center is not appealing to the masses. The once peripheral minorities are now a divided majority.

There is no room for nuance. No debate, just argument. Dichotomies, not a spectrum of ideas. But global issues are not well defined into clearly opposing views. Electric vehicles can be a net good while the environmental cost of dead batteries pose a problem. We can provide rights for some without taking them away from others. We can have strong border policies, and be both discerning and compassionate. We can disagree and not vilify, argue and not attack, debate facts and dismiss logical fallacies.

We can… but will we? Or are the propaganda machines too powerful right now? Are we entering an era where truth is elusive, and biased AI created videos constantly exaggerate perspectives? An era where fact checking is a requirement before accepting information? Throw in ad hominem, personal attacks, and intentional foreign interference focused on deepening polarization, and anti-social social media, and I’m afraid to think about where we are headed.

The bell curve majority of moderate thinkers have dispersed to the extremes, and these extremes are dragging everyone out of the middle. It’s 2024 and I can go on social media and watch a live debate between a scientist and a flat earther, and despite the evidence to the contrary, no flat earther is going to change their mind. I can find a bible prophecy that ignores wild extrapolations and factual inaccuracies, and no countervailing points will be accepted. I can find intelligent people arguing biased and counter factual points, and putting their intellect aside blindly to support a point, a belief, a perspective, or even a political candidate.

I’ve come to the realization that we are just monkeys. We are not civil, we are tribal animals, playing at being intelligent. We are more likely to solve disputes like other animals than we are as humans. We admire bravado, we look down on the meek, we beat our chests and vie for attention. Winning is more important than playing fair. I am safer when my tribe, my group, my monkey troop, is stronger and other troops are dominated.

The bell curve is gone, only warring tribes remain, and the fighting is just going to get uglier.

Recycled and Reused

Recently on social media I’ve seen a lot of ideas reused and reshared. Jokes from my childhood are showing up like they are new. Platitudes are being repeated. And stories are being redone. This isn’t new, but it’s a growing pattern. Look at how many movies are being redone as a perfect example. The same story with new characters.

It’s not just about bringing back the classics. Rather it’s about the constant demand for new content. There just aren’t enough ideas to feed the content machines so riffing off of past content becomes an easier option.

A perfect example is that I’ve seen a couple different reasons of this video recently.

I first saw this go viral 12 years ago and here it is making the rounds again. But it’s not this version, it’s completely redone. Old ideas recycled with new content. There is going to be a lot more of this old content redelivered in the coming years, because the algorithm for engagement is all about putting new content out there fast and often… and new ideas are harder to come up with compared to something that already had success. The old is new again.

The cost of a photograph

Back in July, 2019, when I started writing daily, I wrote ‘Photographs in my mind’. In it I spoke nostalgically about the era of print film and the unknown of if I got the shot I thought I did, until after photos were developed. I also wrote about the photos I ended up not taking, and how some of those are more memorable than the ones I did take. Here is the end of the post with one particular shot that came to mind today.

There was the shot I lined up at Pike Place in Seattle, of an older man sitting on the hood of a parked car enthralled in a book, while cops on the street behind him tended to a fender-bender. I can still see the image that I did not take, feeling like I was invading his privacy.

We seem so much more free to take photos now, always having a camera in our pocket, and not a concern of the cost of taking one more shot.

But of all the shots I didn’t take, the photographs that still linger in my memory. These come to me from an era when film was the only option and the cost of the next shot lingered in my mind.

Today I thought of a different kind of cost, not financial, but maybe social, cultural, or personal. I thought of the potential photo I didn’t take above, and how I felt that I would have been invading this man’s privacy, stealing a moment from him. This made me think of children having photographs and videos shared on social media by parents. Precious moments, but also embarrassing ones. I then thought of photos shared without permission, voyeuristic images shared in confidence then reshared in anger, more often than not by a vindictive, jilted, or just plain mean ex-boyfriend.

I thought of photographs that perpetuate stereotypes, or promote cultural exploitation. I thought of videos that show people at their worst going viral and how they typecast a person on the bases of a single act, one transgression, an embarrassing moment memorialized as the defining of a one-dimensional character.

We don’t live in the film era anymore. We live in an era that is not just witnessed, but fully documented. And I wonder, what is the price? What costs are we paying for the free availability of endless videos and photographs?

Disposition over position

Listen to this wonderful quote by comedian Jimmy Carr:

“Disposition is more important than position”

I’ve only ever known Jimmy Carr as a one-liner comedian. His podcast with Steven Bartlett on Dairy of a CEO has changed my mind. There are so many gems that he shares and it’s worth taking an hour and a half to listen.

It’s fitting that wisdom like this comes from an unexpected place. Even with Steven’s glowing introduction my bar of expectation was still low and I was very pleasantly surprised.

Yesterday morning I listened to the last 30 minutes while on the treadmill, and when Jimmy said this it really hit me.

“You are not the worst thing you’ve ever done.” ~ Jimmy Carr

How many people are measured on social media by the worst thing they have said or done? I’ve written around 2,000 blog posts since I started sharing online 18 years ago. I think I have a pretty decent record of being a pretty decent person, and yet I am keenly aware that I’m one careless sentence or one unpopular opinion away from potentially being ‘cancelled’… of being attacked as rude, biased, or some other derogatory adjective.

I’m not famous and it might not be that big of a deal to others, but it would matter to me. I remember years ago when I was attacked in a comment for being racist. It was very upsetting. Ironically it was on a post that I still consider one of my favourite things I’ve ever written, and to this day it’s the only non-spam comment I ever deleted. But before I did, I checked with people to see if I was off base. I really questioned myself and my perspective. I found out later who wrote that comment, even met him, and I believe changed his mind, but that’s a story for another time.

Going back to the podcast, I enjoyed listening to this enough that I’ll probably end up listening to Jimmy’s book. He really is a fascinating guy and I think I have more to learn from him. On that note, take some time to listen to the Diary of a CEO podcast. Steven interviews some fascinating people and he is an excellent interviewer.

And finally, back to the quote above about disposition, I am reminded of another quote, “It’s not what happens, it’s what you do that makes the difference.” I learned this in an NLP class over 30 years ago, but it actually dates back to Epictetus: “It’s not what happens to you, but how you react to it that matters.

We all have an incredible ability to create our own reality… to take what happens to us and frame it in a way that is positive, that teaches us, that helps us grow.

“Disposition is more important than position. ”

Attention and distraction

Do you ever look at the length of an article or a video before deciding if you’ll bother reading or watching it? Do you ever stop what you are doing to read an incoming message or notification?

How many notifications do you get in a day? How many times is your attention on a task taken away by digital distractions?

After years of these interruptions, how are our brains being re-wired? However much the distractions affect us, they are distracting our younger generations more. I have many notifications turned off on my phone, and I’m not using apps as a means to communicate with friends regularly. Teens today are in constant contact with friends, and even parents, and the interruptions are continuous.

I recently had a lunch at a restaurant with family and no phones came out the entire meal. This is normal for us, but not what we see around us. My daughter mentioned a dinner we had on holidays in Whistler, where a family of a mother and three girls sat next to us. The youngest had headphones on and barely looked up from her iPad. Another was glued to her phone. The third was drawing and had one earphone in. None of them had a single conversation with their mom that any of us witnessed.

I have to wonder, are our attention spans shrinking? Are digital distractions affecting our ability to hold continued focus without interruption? Are we no more than Pavlov’s dogs, salivating at the sound of the next notification?

This isn’t new. TV used to interrupt our shows for commercials. Kids shows like Sponge Bob don’t hold the same camera angle for more than 4 or 5 seconds, giving constant stimulation even when nothing is happening. So, interruptions aren’t new, but they are exponentially worse on unlimited data, social media packed phones.

We are, as Neil Postman suggests, ‘Amusing Ourselves to Death‘. We are slowly destroying our ability to sit focused and uninterrupted on a single task. More than one notification came up while I was writing this, so I’ve obviously not figured out how to reduce the distractions myself. How many years of these distractions before we become incapable of staying on one task for any extended period of time?

Fear to share

I’m pretty honest when I write here. I have written about challenges with my headspace, about how hard it can be to write every day, and when things haven’t necessarily gone well for me. I’ve even ranted a few times about things that drive me nuts. But if you were to look back at my 1,600+ blog posts since I started writing daily, I think you’d see that I’m a pretty positive person.

And still I find myself struggling to share that today was a crummy day for me. Nothing bad happened, I didn’t get any bad news, I just had a crappy, unhappy day. I was in a funk and I couldn’t get out of it.

I recognized it enough to ask a friend to connect with me after work, and he gave me some good advice. So I stayed off my phone other than listening to a podcast in my hot tub. And I’m in bed at 9pm writing this so that I can set it to publish in the morning and sleep in a little later.

It bugs me that I wanted to hide this melancholy feeling and pretend that everything is ok. I am thinking about the problem with the happy lives of Instagramers, who put only the happiest, most perfectly posed photos on their stories, and who hide every blemish, ever disappointment, and every mundane experience or feeling. I don’t want to replicate that. I think it’s ok to say, ‘today sucked, I’m not feeling like I’m in a good place,’ without making people worry about me, or question my happiness at work or at home.

We stigmatize sharing mental health challenges and simultaneously glorify our best lives on social media. No one wants to be seen as ‘broken’. So a simple bad day gets tucked away. And a selfie with a pet and a smile goes online.

Today was not a good day. I’m privileged enough to be able to say that because I have 1,600 other things I’ve written that normalize me and don’t make me look fragile or weak. But how many people hide it? How many smiling Facebook and Instagram posts are masks hiding darker, unshared feelings? How many people would benefit from sharing but don’t have a friend or partner to rely on, or a space to share their feelings and feel safe rather than vulnerable and exposed.

Tomorrow will be a better day for me, I know this already. I’m lucky, I have good coping mechanisms figured out and I’m told by many I have an ‘even keeled’ disposition. Those who know me aren’t going to be concerned about what I’ve written.

But what about those who aren’t ok? Who don’t have good coping strategies, and who have a fear to share? How hard is it for them to see the happy, smiling social media posts, oblivious that some of those posts mask the same feelings they have?

Not everyone is as fortunate as me to be able to share a crappy day and not feel judged.

The digital wall

What is it about the internet that gives people permission to be awful and mean to others? I follow an astrophysicist on social media. She’s brilliant, and makes great content. She also posted a rant about all the misogynistic comments she gets from men commenting on her rather than her content. I’m not sharing any more details because it looks like she took the video down.

This is just one of many examples of people behaving badly from the safety of behind their keyboards. Many don’t even hide behind an anonymous profile, no they are just openly rude, mean, and/or sexist. I don’t understand the desire to do this? I don’t understand how a digital profile somehow creates the permissions to do this?

Would these people say the same things if they were physically in a crowded room with the person they are actively being inappropriate with? In most cases I would guess not. But somehow their keyboard acts as a digital wall separating them from their bad deeds.

I wonder what these people would think if someone was saying the same rude things they are saying online to one of their family members? Would that be enough to stop them? Would they think it was ok if a person spoke like them to their daughter? What would it take to make them realize what jerks they are being?

I’m pretty sure Neil deGrasse Tyson doesn’t face the sexism the female astrophysicist I mentioned above does. I bet the internet is a very different place for these two people with similar jobs. The inequity is magnified on the digital, social media front. The blatantly sexist and rude comments of yesterday-year are still alive and well on the internet.

I’m not the one getting the worst of it, so I don’t see it that much. Yet it still bothers me. I’d hope to see a change for the better soon, but I’m not terribly optimistic. In fact, I think it will likely get worse before it gets better. I hope not, but I think so.