What’s meta with Meta?
We can argue all day about the real motivation behind the name change but we would not really get to the bottom of things. Or we can ask ourselves a question with larger implications: How would Meta’s venture into the metaverse impact our individual lives, our social interactions, and the overall health of democracy? If indeed Meta wants to go meta, it is important to dissect what it exactly means for us.
Facebook is now officially Meta. The social technology giant announced the name change over the past week in its bid to lead the tech industry towards ushering in the “metaverse.” Meta is casting a wide net in augmented and virtual realities (AR/VR) to significantly shape human social interactions in both personal and professional spheres. CEO Mark Zuckerberg says that the metaverse will create “the feeling of presence” in the virtual world and promises to build it responsibly through an initial $50 million investment in both global research and programs.
The decision to go Meta was met with both criticisms and parodies across the online sphere. Several companies changed their names in jest to ride the trend. Many more argued that the action was a marketing ploy, a move to unburden its sister apps with what Facebook insiders call the “brand tax.” A surge of backlash from a series of investigative stories released by The Wall Street Journal and the Congressional testimony made by whistleblower Frances Haugen added salt to fresh wounds. Amid the storm, Zuckerberg remains defiant — the allegations were selective, they are not merely doing a PR stunt but is consciously undertaking a path towards a new era for the beleaguered company.
When I first heard the name change news, I immediately googled the meaning of “meta.” It is a common phrase used by young people when somebody starts explaining certain concepts in a different, often mind-boggling standpoint. The Urban Dictionary, a go-to website for new slangs and memes, defines it as “seeing things from a higher perspective, instead of from within the thing, like being self-aware.” Merriam Webster agrees: “showing or suggesting an explicit awareness of itself or oneself as a member of its category; cleverly self-referential.”
Into the metaverse
17 years in the tech industry and Meta is on its road to maturity. How could this benign action — a name change — mean for the future of our humanity and democracy? In a meta perspective, this means two important insights: first, Meta’s venture into a brave, new world and its ethical implications; and second, the increasing role of tech companies in introducing innovations and bringing forth social good.
Creating new worlds is exciting and fascinating. In the metaverse, individuals with VR headsets and smartphones can create their own avatars to interact in various virtual environments while actual bodies are ensconced in the comforts of their homes. The “metaverse” first coined by Neal Stephenson in his 1992 novel Snow Crash would be just as entertained. But the beauty of technology also has its tradeoffs as shown in Ernest Cline’s Ready Player One and Charlie Booker’s popular anthology series Black Mirror. If fictional stories have something to tell, it is that we must tread these innovations carefully. We may be losing more than the conveniences promised by these topnotch technological solutions.
Meta promises to build the metaverse responsibly in four aspects: economic opportunity, privacy, safety and integrity, and equity and inclusion. Its partnership with several non-profit groups and increased funding for XR research and development seem to be going in the right direction. But several concerns should be flagged: bottlenecks for small apps that must reach a certain standard before gaining distribution from Facebook’s VR market; the company’s anti-competitive stance especially in the XR industry; and its potential adverse implications to mental rights. A deeper dive into the metaverse without actual understanding of mental rights may create opportunities to “understand someone’s thinking and hack their attention patterns… undermine their own free will.” Ensuring that we have norms and rules for these new innovations would be necessary or the dangers of the metaverse may insidiously affect our lives.
A force for good?
Tech companies have increasingly become important partners in advancing various aspects of human development and social good. Meta alone launched its own Charitable Giving, Crisis Response, Health, and Mentorship programs in its Facebook platform. Other big tech companies such as Google, IBM, Microsoft, and Amazon organized their own social initiatives in the fields of education, financial literacy, accessibility, and health. Some have even ventured into skills challenges and hackathons to generate further public support.
One may note that these are forces for good. But it reeks of injustice and inequity. First, we give up our data and privacy in exchange for little comforts and support to individuals. Compared to our safety and health, the minute details of our lives are more profitable for big tech companies — for ads, development of future technologies, and further manipulation of consumer desires. Data is the new currency and big tech is milking us for it. Second, tech companies have created easy fixes to the world’s most complex problems. It becomes problematic because we think everything could be solved by neatly computed figures, probabilistic models, and tweaks in algorithms. Take for instance, Facebook’s “Suicidal Prevention Tool” or Microsoft’s Project Horus.
Last, technological solutionism recreates and/or multiplies existing inequalities present in the offline world. Algorithms and technologies are still done by human beings who are, in turn, influenced by their own biases. We see these in facial recognition AIs or cybersecurity features. It is no wonder that much of the technology we have today are skewed against people of color and take advantage of those in the Global South.
Where do we go from here?
Facebook transforming into Meta is indeed beyond a PR stunt. It is a masterful move to show how much of our social lives are dependent on its reins; a strategic mechanism to evade responsibilities for the havoc it has helped create. The metaverse is a powerful narrative to sell.
We must do everything in our collective power to hold these tech companies accountable and develop more grassroots-led solutions to our societal challenges. Some working examples include digital and media literacy campaigns for various age brackets, third-party fact-checking initiatives, and advocating for legislations that would compel platforms such as Meta to allow users greater control over their data and making it more transparent.
The avatars and nifty costumes in the metaverse may look nice; but reality tells us, offline and virtual, that we are mere pixels and data points for Zuckerberg’s vision of the future. That should wake us from our meta-dreams.