The Antisocial Network

The Antisocial Network

Facebook can’t seem to help itself from getting in the news at every turn. It has achieved what I’m sure many people would have declared as unlikely and that is to get just about everyone against them. Watching the 2010 Jesse Eisenberg rendition of Mark Zuckerberg as he spawnsThe Facebook from his Harvard dorm room out of spite for the woman who spurned his affections, you do get a prescient view of the warped psyche that has created and led the social networking behemoth into the controversial waters it now inhabits. Fucking with people’s emotions en masse and using their thoughts and desires to drive a media monetization effort makes Robert Downey Sr.’s 60’s classic Putney Swope seem tame by comparison. We have known for years that media messaging has great impact on society, but I’m not sure many of us predicted the extent to which the advent of big data and even bigger digital processing power and data storage would allow the evil geniuses of Silicon Valley (not so much Madison Avenue any more) to mess with out national culture.

As they say about hypnotism, it is unlikely that you can alter a person’s personality, but you sure as hell do seem able to modify the social filters, governors and guardrails such that the worst instincts can be released into the wind. By devious data-driven infiltration of man’s baser preferences, you seem to be able to reinforce the salacious and socially undesirable tendencies by dredging them up and placing them before him over and over again. This is not subliminal influence because it is both very intentional and very much out in the open. Manipulating the subconscious mind of society is one thing, but attacking the conscious soul of an individual and making him or her confront their lesser angels on a repeated and daily basis is a pernicious manipulation of our most valuable social attribute, which is our collective conscience.

All of the revelations from the Facebook Papers as divulged by ex-employees, most notably and most recently Frances Haugen are being poured over by every investigative journalist worth his or her salt. Mark Zuckerberg is a classic modern villain to us all in that his arrogance and smugness makes him inherently unlikeable. The Social Network laid this all bare even though it showed him to be a formidable genius that would clearly influence the world. He cheats his roommate and partner, he disrespects and denigrates his old girlfriend, he listens to the degenerate advice of anther truly antisocial phenom, Sean Parker, he takes on the BMOCs and instead of looking like the deserving underdog, he looks like the irritating and petulant child from some Twilight Zone episode that is way too powerful and Godlike and treats other humans like they were ants under a heated magnifying glass.

It is interesting to note that while Sean Parker became the first President of Facebook, making some $2.4 billion as an early stockholder, he has since recanted and taken a contrary stand towards what Facebook stands for. Parker has gone so far as to expressed concerns about the role of Facebook in society, saying that it “exploit[s] a vulnerability in human psychology” as it creates a “social-validation feedback loop.” That statement made during an interview in 2017 seems prescient given the most recent revelations of how Facebook organizes its personalization efforts to reinforce the prurient and antisocial tendencies of its subscribers.

If someone asked me what I thought the most dangerous societal trend right now in the world is, I would probably say that it is some blend between authoritarianism and extremism. I’m not sure we can blame the authoritarian trend on Facebook, though it does seem to be willing to reinforce it, but there is mounting evidence that Parker was right and that the social-validation feedback loop is creating a divisiveness and a willingness towards blatant antisocial behavior that is best exemplified by the rantings of Donald J. Trump. He does not simply get away with antisocial rhetoric and behavior, he actually brags about it in the most obscene ways. The classic line that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and get away with it is emblematic of that approach and it caries through his exaggerated tendency to lie constantly and grotesquely in the pursuit of whatever whim strikes him at the moment. If caught in the lie, he shrugs it off and laughs about our collective gullibility as though it is his God-given right to do as he pleases.

On the surface I’m sure Mark Zuckerberg and his senior team would claim that they abhor the Trump mantra and the Big Lie and use as evidence that they have banned him once his actions after the election proved that he could not be trusted with a legitimate social media presence. But as we all find ourselves admitting sooner or later, it is not Donald J. Trump that concerns us as much as it is the following and mimicking of the base (who is mimicking who?) and ultimately the rude and divisive nature of the views being expressed by a substantial portion of the electorate that feels it is not just OK to say these things, but that it is necessary to say them.

As I read all the latest revelations about Facebook, its “algorithm” and the decisions it has taken, I find myself more and more stunned. There is no doubt that there is a tricky balance between free speech and not amplifying untruths, but at every turn it seems that Facebook is making the wrong decision and then justifying it on the back of the bigger picture of freedom of expression or the notion that the world needs their social media platform and that it does more good in keeping people connected than any bad it might do by giving air to lies or amplification to negativism. The recent decision in Vietnam to to cow-tow to the authoritarian government’s demand for censorship of political anti-government views has clearly shown Zuckerberg (who made the ultimate decision himself) to put revenues (1% of Facebook revenues come from Vietnam) ahead of righteousness and dissident expression. The decision is blatantly unconscionable and supportive of antisocial acts with the flimsiest of excuses being that the Vietnamese people need the Facebook Platform even if it is distorted by governmental bias.

This has all put Zuckerberg and Facebook in the crosshairs and with no corner to hide in. The liberals detest the Zuckerberg lack of righteousness in favor of commercialism. The conservatives detest Zuckerberg for his power to shut them down if he so chooses for whatever reason. There is no safe harbor left for Zuckerberg or Facebook. As the largest Social Media force in the world, there is only so much anyone, even the U.S. Government can do quickly to alter this situation. The one thing that could happen is for us all to collectively vote with out feet and leave the antisocial network. I am proceeding to shut down my Facebook membership right now. I, for one, can live without it.