A law derived from a 1950’s legal battle over obscene books currently dictates freedom of speech on the internet. Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act ruled that social media platforms cannot be blamed for the content posted on their site, just as a bookstore cannot be held liable for the sale of obscene books on its shelves.
The internet, however, is not a bookstore. 72 percent of Americans visit the social media “bookstore” almost every day. The “bookstore” wheels users through the aisles with horse blinders, as robotic arms extend from the shelves, offering books in exchange for likes, all while cameras scan users’ retinas for slight interest. All of this ensures that the system eventually drops users off in a dusty corner, surrounded by similar people and a constant flow of addicting, niche content.
Section 230 was passed three decades ago, an era that predates the creation of the modern internet giants: Google and Facebook. Since then, social media algorithms have developed rapidly, and are now capable of creating filter bubbles which lead to ignorance and misinformation. In addition, the rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbots poses new risks of misinformation. One of the most alarming risks being that the machine learning model behind ChatGPT reinforces racial and gender bias within its pattern recognition, which is then embedded into its responses. When users depend on AI software for answers, despite its inherent biases, society loses control of truth.
People have virtually no warranty over their content choices, as the algorithm feeds them recommended content which guarantees user engagement, and thus generates a surplus of advertisement revenue for the tech giants. The government must hold these corporations accountable, otherwise algorithms will continue to polarize the nation and facilitate cycles of violence.
Everyone is Worried about Data Collection
Social media regulation could easily become a bipartisan issue. It is a new, developing topic that troubles both the right and the left, yet both parties are unable to identify what exactly is wrong with speech on the internet. Misinformation troubles Democrats, while censorship infuriates Republicans. The center of both these issues is unregulated data mining.
Data is a commodity that is uncertain and powerful. Social media companies “mine” data by tracking millions of user profiles and using this information to draw conclusions and patterns about populations and their habits. Big Tech companies extract user data, storing it in large banks of information and then using it to generate algorithms that can target users and boost engagement with precision and secrecy.
With the development of AI, data privacy concerns have grown exponentially. AI software relies on data, whether it is harvested with intentional consent or not. Many current models harvest data through the “shadows” of clicks and scrolls that consumers leave behind on other internet sites, as well as facial recognition and data from wearable technology.
The inefficient and outdated Section 230 does not account for data mining: the economic and social epicenter that fuels Big Tech. Most suggested approaches for regulating social media, such as former President Biden’s, only address algorithms, but dismiss the concept that algorithms can only function with data collection.
Lawmakers need to pass regulations that limit the amount of personal data an internet platform can store, and enforce accountability to allow users to see and edit the data that is influencing the content on their feeds. Transparency with data collection is an evolving standard that can help combat future technologies from inconspicuously using personal information to target users.
It’s Broken, Let’s Fix It
This data collection transparency act would be similar to the data privacy protection law that ensures users the right to either opt in or out of cookies on sites, meaning that users will be able to see exactly what data is being collected on each platform and customize their algorithm. This would give users the agency to dictate the content that is shown and recommended to them. In this way, Big Tech companies evade blame for recommending content, and people can view content outside of their interests. This would balance the need for limiting the creation of filter bubbles and protecting free speech on the internet.
Lobbying this act begins with making sure bipartisan interests are at the forefront of the conversation. With TikTok and Chinese data collection concerns at the forefront of the social media discussion, it should not take much to convince Republicans that data management must be transparent, given their anti-China policy stance. In addition, data transparency will address the conservative concern of censorship and restriction of free speech because users can bypass the algorithm and view content holistically.
On the other side of the aisle, misinformation concerns trouble liberals. Misinformation stems from algorithms repeatedly showing similar and niche content to target susceptible users, as well as deceptive AI generated content. Big Tech corporations can weaponize this spread of misinformation as a form of unchecked power over election outcomes. Shrouded in secrecy, data is Big Tech’s largest asset, thus Democratic lawmakers should be thrilled about taking power away from Big Tech billionaires.
At this point, the panic around data collection has disseminated into the public sphere on both sides of the political aisle. As of 2020, 69 percent of mobile app users are concerned about how their personal data is being collected and analyzed. In addition, 81 percent of consumers feel they need to trust a brand before they consume their product. If more than half of Big Tech’s users begin to drop off the platforms because they fear data privacy breaches, the companies must create transparency.
Other than a bill introduced in the Senate in 2007, which was abandoned, there has been no federal action taken to regulate data mining. Almost two decades later, social media has become ubiquitous, and with it, data even more precious. There is a severe lack of urgency when it comes to data privacy laws because American politics finds itself stuck between a select number of polarizing issues that make the headlines. As polarization rises in the country, fewer and fewer bills are passed each year. Lawmakers from both parties must push for accountability from Big Tech companies before technology continues to become more invasive.
Modern Problems Require Modern Policymakers
Algorithms, artificial intelligence, and social media are just the tip of the flood of new technologies entering the market, thus lawmakers must be prepared to create regulations that keep these tech conglomerates in check. Legislators’ ignorance of social media, AI, and algorithm function is contributing to the lack of legislation on this topic. There is an immediate need for younger legislators who understand the functions and significance social media and algorithms have in the modern world.
Reforming Section 230 and advocating for Big Tech accountability can only be successful if legislators are aware of the rising technology-dependent generation of voters who will be taking the reins of business, policy, and society within the next decade.
