Portfolio Assignment 4
This week’s readings covered many aspects of the internet that we take for granted and often don’t think critically enough about. Gillespie’s “The Politics of Platforms” discussed how companies use the term “platform” in order to create a digital and commercial environment that allows them to profit without having to deal with the messy work of being responsible for the content uploaded to said platform. Aside from the discursive work that results from companies’ use of the term platform, there are also implications related to individual use. These “platforms” are held up as open spaces where people can express themselves — creatively and politically — and the assumption is that these open spaces are even playing fields; yet, the development and use of algorithms prove that to be false.
In the Vox article “What is Monoculture?,” Chayka discusses the algorithm and Big Data’s effect on the range of artifacts, characters, voices, and stories that are recognizable to a specific demographic. While what we consume on these platforms like Youtube and Spotify may seem like each piece of content receives the same opportunity for mass exposure, the algorithm instead promotes sameness and pushes content that is “optimized for the digital platforms of the attention economy.” The algorithm, in theory, is supposed to curate content specifically for us as individuals, but time and time again the content forced on us is homogenous and often lacking in diversity.
Not only that but consuming content on large-scale platforms comes with implications related to our privacy and personal data. The article “The new surveillance capitalism” speaks to the evolution of an entirely new commercial industry online. Surveillance Capitalism is the process of “companies providing free services in return for unlimited access to users’ personal information and data trails, which are then refined, packaged, and sold to advertisers.” One quote that really stuck out to me from the reading is “If the service is free, then you are the product.” I can’t express how true this is. In terms of my own use of digital media, I always cringe when I see a “this website uses cookies…” message or a Terms and Agreement page. I know that my search, viewing, and purchasing habits are all being monitored — which is quite unsettling to think about. Yet, as unsettling as it is, we continue to use these websites because the ease and access outweigh our need for privacy.
Relating to my use of social media, algorithms on these sites are responsible for pretty much all of the content I consume. On one hand, it’s nice because a lot of the content actually is appealing, yet it’s frustrating that there is such a wide range of content creators that I have never — and probably will never — encounter. I’m a huge conspiracy theorist and lately, the Youtube algorithm has tanked all conspiracy theory channels and related content. It’s almost impossible to find content that is actually relevant, and when you do, all of the related videos are completely unrelated to the topic.
The obvious push away from anything unconventional or political by Youtube is disheartening and somewhat ironic. Youtube prides itself as being a platform of the people, yet they choose what receives the most exposure while in the midst of practicing low-key censorship. I am a small content creator myself, which makes the algorithm even more frustrating. Your content has to be highly specific and tailored to the algorithm in order to receive that initial push that propels people to your channel/page. Instead of being about the content, social media now is kind of like a game — we’re all trying to beat the algorithm to get a crumb of exposure.
My keyword is “cloud.” The discursive work that companies have done with the term is impressive, to say the least. The cloud is a digital landscape to store data. It involves stashing data on hardware in a remote physical location, which can be accessed from any device via the internet. This should sound scary, yet all we think about when we hear the term “cloud” is “convenience.” The literal definition of cloud refers to the white things that form in the sky. Clouds are perceived as ornate and harmless, but most importantly — untouchable. When we think of a cloud, we think of something far, far away, out of our world and atmosphere. We see them, but they’re above us and therefore not of consequence. When we put things in the “cloud” it’s like we’re putting them in a place that’s untouchable, out of our frame of reference until it’s time to retrieve our data (aside from when the sky looks ominous, would we even think about or notice clouds if we didn’t make a conscious effort?).
Big tech companies have used this discursive work to their advantage. They communicate that their storage devices are untouchable and sight unseen except by users who have access, but what about the companies themselves? What about hackers? The cloud isn’t a private storage device at all, but rather more than just the individual has access to it, much like a real cloud.
