Why We Need to Radically Reframe the Big Tech Debate
Source: Medium | Nida Sajid | April 1, 2109
How many times have we come across such eye-roll-inducing clickbait headlines? When it comes to debating the pros and cons of technology, even the so-called quality press seems to have jumped on the tabloid bandwagon, despite their purported seriousness.
When we are not being scaremongered, we are instead inundated with rosy pictures of techno-utopias painted by Silicon Valley behemoths. The likes of Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple, also known as Big Tech, religiously churn out carefully crafted mission statements each year. They celebrate the ubiquity of technology, whilst glossing over problems of accountability, transparency and privacy.
Despite the disparity in opinions, the technocritics and technocrats have a lot in common when it comes to conveying their respective viewpoints. Sensationalism drives the discourse, resulting in a debate that is stale, polarised and futile.
Clearly, there is a dire need to renew and reshape the current tech debate, in order to break the stalemate. So how do we go about this?
Here are a few ways to get started:
Include the wider public in discourse
Media outlets often adopt a ‘let’s leave it to the experts’ approach whereby snappy quotes from well-known panegyrics or polemics form the crux of the discussion.
Whilst it is necessary to tap into specialist knowledge, it is equally important to widen the participation pool by engaging the public — a disillusioned demographic most impacted by technology but least involved in debating its effects.
Moreover, being mindful that the ‘public’ isn’t a monolithic entity but a rich, diverse mix of communities, will allow us to uncover instances where the same piece of technology might impact people in vastly different ways. Algorithms being a prime example whereby baked-in biases amplify discrimination against already marginalised groups.
With the emphasis on User Experience (UX) in digital circles, it’s only natural to extrapolate this pattern to the broader tech discussion.
Apply spectrum thinking
Existing discourses are characterised by all-encompassing classifications of technology as either intrinsically good or inherently evil.
Oversimplified narratives are often deployed which can easily slide into people’s existing frames of reference, squashing any opportunity for dialectic dialogue.
Confirmation bias and echo chambers are also at play here, whereby instead of searching for new information, we seek to validate existing predispositions.
If we truly want to unpack the nuances and complexities of technology-driven change, we need to leverage spectrum thinking. Moving away from rigid compartments and towards fluid gradients will allow us to unlock granular insights often missed by the constraints of dichotomous patterns of thinking.
Decouple intent from impact
According to a statement of intent published by Facebook, its aim is to ‘help people connect with the people they want.’
Today, the tech titan does much more.
We have witnessed firsthand how it regularly enables extremist ideologies, broadcasts misinformation and causes depressive and anxiety disorders.
Such functions are often masked by Mark Zuckerberg’s abstract soliloquies, laced with quasi-profound expressions such as ‘building global community’.
Focusing on how modern technologies are being used in the real-world as opposed to why they were originally designed, failings and pitfalls which are otherwise overlooked, are brought to the forefront.
So what’s next?
This year has seen a burgeoning people-centric movement which could potentially pave the way for overhauling the wider tech debate.
Apple’s CEO Tim Cook has recently urged industry giants to step up when it comes to data privacy and online security, whilst simultaneously recognising the centrality of users,
Given the tumultuous events of 2018, from Apple’s iPhone battery ‘throttling’to the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal, these pledges are to be taken with a pinch of salt.
What we definitely do know is that the real tech debate still needs to occur. The question is whether this is the year it will finally happen?