Reading The Filter Bubble- Part 1

           Eli Pariser has perfectly captured an aspect of internet culture that has widened my understanding of life online and how that behavior affects everything. The easiest way to give a consumer what they want is, after all, simply to ask. Acquiring tons of personal data by watching everything someone does online does seem a bit excessive, although from what I’ve gathered so far it seems to have become an effective method (however creepy it may be).

            It seems that each individual’s world has become smaller as a direct result of these ‘filter bubbles’. We have come full circle from the pre-technology era – where each person’s world consisted of town they lived in – through the expansion of that world view through higher literacy rates and easier information access, all the way back to a similarly narrow place; the modern era of personalization where, instead of not having access to information, people have the ability to block it out completely. The world of information has become an ever-changing one, completely dependent upon the fleeting whimsy of shares, likes, and ‘click signals’.

            At one point, Pariser talks about YouTube’s “Lean Back” strategy plans. It is something that would take the viewer to another video as soon as the one they chose has finished. ‘Lean Back’ is essentially taking that list of recommended videos and playing them one after the other. In 2011, when this book was written, this endless feed of videos was still simply a project; today this is an established feature of the site. Instead of just a list of suggestions, your viewing choice will now culminate in a countdown to the next video YouTube has chosen for you. With the addition of ads before videos, this is quickly becoming television with a comments section. Unlike television, however, you have the options of creating your own content and a handy personalization algorithm to help you along the way.

            These personalization algorithms are, essentially, looking at your online life and then handing you a reflection of yourself and your choices in order to guide you to what they think you will either enjoy or purchase or both. It is a system entirely reliant on the fickle wants of consumers that are developing shorter and shorter attention spans. But if an overwhelming majority of the internet is giving a consumer what they want, who is providing them with what they need? We all know that, in order to be a functioning human being, it is occasionally necessary to do things you don’t want to do. Say you find an article on your news feed boasting ‘facts’ that prove a political view you agree with. You have found something that endorses your chosen world view; this makes you feel good and smart, you want to go on believing this thing that makes you feel validated. But have you bothered to check if it’s true? I know I don’t do that as much as I would like to admit. But fact-checking is something that needs to be done in order to form a well-rounded understanding, no matter how wonderful it would be for that one article to be true. It’s not something that everyone necessarily wants to do, but what are we if we are simply content to accept the information that is pre-sorted and handed to us? To me, blind faith is something carefully trusted to loved ones, not Facebook.