Book Offer
This will close in 10 seconds
The Irish Times hosted an article yesterday from the Irish Council for Civil Liberties’ Johnny Ryan, in which the Director of Enforce called for action against “extreme material” online, a label that he seemed to apply to quite a variety of content.
Contained within that umbrella were a number of things that I’m sure everyone, this writer included, could get behind everyone seeing less of on social media: videos related to self-harm and suicide for example, as Mr Ryan mentions. Such content is universally recognised as being objectively detrimental, especially to any young people who may see it.
However, also contained within that ‘extreme’ umbrella Mr Ryan outlined were things of quite a different nature, which Mr Ryan, and indeed, a majority of Irish society may find distasteful, but which in no way deserves to be categorised alongside content promoting suicide or self-harm.
“Social media promised to bring us closer together. Instead, it pushes videos of self-harm and suicide at our kids, and amplifies hysteria and division in our society,” Mr Ryan wrote, clarifying that the solution to this dilemma will be found in understanding that “this is a data problem, not a speech problem”.
He goes on to write, though: “Niches of extreme opinion are a constant of human history. What is different today is that extreme niche opinions are artificially boosted for profit by algorithms on digital platforms. Without this artificial algorithmic amplification, extreme material would be lost in the deluge of things posted by other people in that same instant. It would be unseen except by a tiny niche.”
To the superficial reader, this all sounds very reasonable – who wants suicide and self-harm, or explosive, murderous, divisive rhetoric artificially amplified – but hidden within it is a troubling question, especially in Ireland: how exactly do we define “extreme opinion”? Once you start trying to do that, it very much turns out that you’re grappling with a “speech problem”, if not even a ‘thought problem’.
Mr Ryan’s only specific example in the article will have done little to reassure those who find themselves deviating from mainstream Irish political thought that they won’t find their own convictions targeted for de-amplification.
“Each person receives the perfect drop of poison for their individual ear, playing upon their worst instincts and driving them to extreme opinions. Meta’s secret internal research, leaked by whistleblower Frances Haugen, confirmed that its algorithm artificially pushes political extremes: if a person in the US followed only verified conservative news accounts, they were soon recommended extreme conspiracy content,” he wrote.
There it is again, the suggestion, if even by omission, that conservative opinions lead to extreme and conspiratorial thinking. I would have little to no confidence that were the measures Mr Ryan recommends to the Taoiseach followed, it would mainly, if not exclusively, see the restriction of political opinion and content that falls outside of the current mainstream in Ireland. I imagine it would see much of the, admittedly, strongly-worded opposition to immigration pushed into the shadows, probably along with material critical of trans ideology, graphic condemnations of abortion, and whatever else doesn’t sufficiently endorse the line Ireland is currently taking.
The problems with defining the word ‘extreme’ when it comes to political opinion, as our readers will undoubtedly be aware but which Mr Ryan and others may need to consider, are that it’s an inherently subjective undertaking, which is why traditionally lawmaking has limited itself to that which can be concretely identified as directly inciting violence. That is, unless we want to bring back a revamped, societal sense of ‘blasphemy’, which is a project that clearly does appeal to a disturbing number of activists and politicians.
The aforementioned political positions I’ve mentioned as being primed for de-amplification – opposition to Government immigration strategy, to the rewriting of sexual morality, and to the industrialised killing of tens of thousands of unborn children since abortion was introduced here – are all not only valid positions to espouse, but entirely understandable too if you don’t antagonise those who hold them.
They’re valid because they’re expressions of dissatisfaction with the country’s current governance, which is not only allowed but to be encouraged in a democracy. Sycophantic approval of government policy is traditionally the desired public attitude in totalitarian states, not democracies. However, even if sycophantic approval isn’t what we’re aiming for, it is what we threaten to limit ourselves to, if that’s allowed to flourish while, again, ‘distasteful’ criticism is repressed.
Once users are back in control, Mr Ryan wrote, “we can still have all the cat videos, celebrity gossip and arcane memes that make the internet wonderful”. Rewrite the way social media is governed and all of the angry people can disappear from your timeline, along with the silly old problems they kept talking about.
Citing the US political landscape as he did, one wonders whether Mr Ryan would agree with the assessment that the ruling elite are prone to their madnesses, too, and whether he’d be comfortable with that kind of ‘joy’ (as the Democrats have decided their election line is to be) ought to be addressed. As I was writing this, it emerged that applications for jobs with Kamala Harris’s campaign allow you to choose from 11 different pronouns you’d like to go by. Included were old-fashioned he/him, she/her – the usual – alongside newcomers like ‘fae/faer’ and ‘hu/hu’.
Cra/Zy pic.twitter.com/ltFGtSGNrm
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) August 16, 2024
That’s extreme material if ever I saw it, and yet I struggle to believe that if we did do an algorithmic shakeup the likes of which we’re discussing here, that these issuances from the US, which our politicians seem to have such an appetite for, would find itself given the cold shoulder. I think it much more likely that’s the sort of thing that makes the internet ‘wonderful’, and that keeps us all on an even keel and capable of enjoying cat videos and celebrity gossip undisturbed.
This will close in 10 seconds