Discussing the European Parliament's Paper on Polarization and the use of technology in political campaigns and communication
In terms of nations and organizations that are at the forefront of recognizing the potential negative impact of the growing power of the digital age, the European Union (EU) seems to be one of the top leaders. The European Parliament (EP) published a paper, Polarisation and the use of technology in political campaigns and communication, which shows how the EU plans to deal with the political polarization online. They first address in their 60-page paper on the topic that social media has gained prominence in the political realm as false information and narratives have seen to take place of commonality. The three areas of focus include accountability and transparency, user activation and contextual literacy, and greater investment in digital infrastructures to help prepare future policymaking.
As mentioned in previous posts before is the term echo-chambers, the EU recognizes the danger of them to society. The EP also makes a good point in stating how polarization is manipulated by the social media companies and how they sell user data to construct even more personalized data algorithms. Another problem the EP addresses is the cyber threat of Russia to sow division in western countries like the U.S, Estonia, Latvia to name a few. The use of bots with pro-Russia stances have been on the rise in many instances such as the 2016 U.S Presidential Election and the protests for Catlan independence from Spain. The EP does mention the counterargument that polarization can be ultimately good for society as it increases political participation and awareness. While increased political participation and awareness is good, I find the counterargument very weak. If polarization is not as harmful as some scholars' debate (Hetherington, 2008), then why has Russia recognized the role of bots to divide western nations? Russia using bots to spread disinformation to make societies more polarized shows the power in which bots and the online realm as a whole is susceptible to people with evil intentions.
After they had laid out the evils and dangers of polarization and how it happens, they then move on to thinking about solutions to the problem. One successful affordance (feature) of one social media company is Reddit and its ChangeMyView(CMV) subreddit community. Compared to other social media companies, the subreddit community is designed to foster positive meaningful civil dialogue. The subreddit has moderators that are users that determine what is offensive and should be removed. It is a topic of a future post I plan to break down and explain how it can be a model for meaningful dialogue online. In conclusion, the EU and specifically the EP recognizes the dangers of political polarization and how it is originated. The graph above shows the Balkans and eastern Europe as the main victims of polarization in contemporary times. Russia is known to have an interest in undermining people's attitudes in these countries. Accepting that Russia has an interest in sparking division in western societies online is an important part of why the EP published this report.
Polarisation and the Use of Technology in ... - European Parliament. Polarisation and the use of technology in political campaigns and communication. European Parliament, March 2019. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2019/634414/EPRS_STU(2019)634414_EN.pdf.
Reducing Pernicious Polarization: A Comparative Historical Analysis of Depolarization - Scientific Figure on ResearchGate. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Polarization-in-Europe-Since-1900_fig1_360588685 [accessed 30 Mar, 2023]
Comments
Post a Comment