From Public Screen to Dystopia: Facebook, Algorithms, and Disinformation

The public sphere has dissolved. In its place, the public screen. Though their article was published over ten years ago, Kevin DeLuca's and Jennifer Peeples' article highlights cultural moments not unlike our own. In over more than 2000 U.S. cities and towns, protesters took to the streets, producing images critiquing police brutality and the egregious killing of George Floyd. In some cities and towns, the protests continue. DeLuca and Peeples, if having written their article today, would still be interested in the obsessive focus on violence. But one thing is missing here: 

Social Media. 

If written today, what would DeLuca and Peeples say about Facebook? About fake news or disinformation? What about the thousands upon thousands of bots that patrol Twitter, populating threads with disinformation or images from unrelated events parading them as contextually accurate? I don't think DeLuca and Peeples were necessarily optimistic with these "new conditions for...participatory democracy" but they refer to technologies that many people don't participate in anymore, like watching television for the news or reading newspapers (126). I do, however, believe that DeLuca and Peeples lay the foundation for us to discuss this new public sphere. First, they warn that "we cannot simply adopt the term 'public sphere' and all it entails" because that form relies on speech and text, not screens. Little did they know how important "screens" would become 18 years later. They were optimistic, however, in the potential of these screens to influence grassroots movements. Movements like Black Lives Matter. 

Some sources say that BLM is the biggest movement in American history. It's also a movement built online. So DeLuca and Peeples were correct in stating that this new arena of discourse allows those who are disenfranchised, voiceless, and marginalized a platform to participate in democracy. It's difficult to disagree with this statement. Hypermediacy allows us to consume information in a plethora of different ways and on different screens. This exposes us to the evil corporations are hiding from us or the murderers that put on a uniform and claim to protect us. Like DeLuca and Peeples state, this sort of exposure can force big corporations into bending the knee or to bring justice to black folks murdered by the police. But there's another side to this coin and it has the power to destroy democracy--if it hasn't already (sorry for being so cynical, Mike).

On any given day we might see a tweet that directs us to a trending topic. We then read from that source. If maximum virality is achieved, then we might see this same story mediated through other mediums (memes, images, gifs, tik-tok videos, etc.). There is simply too much to consume on any given day. And most of it is meant to enrage us, nudging us to sharpen our pitchforks. Alas, we sit furiously behind our computer screens, tablets, or cellphones, tweeting and posting and sharing. DeLuca and Peeples sort of address this onslaught of information by saying its simply impossible to keep up with all of it (135). To them, it isn't a bad thing and, perhaps, even good that we choose what to consume and what not to consume. 

But DeLuca and Peeples don't talk about algorithms. They don't talk about the rich white dudes in silicon valley forcibly colonizing the entire planet with their toxic social media platforms (see this article). How could they when Zuckerberg didn't start Facebook until 2004? Since then, many scholars have discussed this same dissolution of the public sphere. Instead of the media cherry picking images of violence, it's artificial intelligence and it knows all about you. It knows what gifs you'll watch or likely skip, it knows when you are near your crush, and it's fighting for your attention. Though this new frontier of public discourse is promising, affording movements like BLM to take hold and gain traction, the flip side of the coin is much, much darker. Truth is bent and shaped into a grotesque monster on this side of the coin and information, regardless of credibility, is used advantageously, often against the common good.

DeLuca and Peeples have many important and valuable things to say that we in 2020 should be paying attention to. But, like the rich white boys in silicon valley, they couldn't anticipate how fucked these screens and devices would make us.