Bubblicious

Back when I was a kid, and still liked gum, I preferred Hubba Bubba over Bubblicious. My eyes would zero in on that brand at the grocery store, because that's what I liked. Now, computers can do the zeroing in for us, placing us in our own custom-crafted information bubble.

I recently read this interesting article about the way the web (Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) use automated algorithms to filter what we see, based on our personal web use history. This is nothing we didn't already know - we've all seen how well Amazon shows us suggestions based on other stuff we've bought (or even looked at).

Although the retailer algorithms can be handy, we have also all seen how they can be stupid. For example, last week I searched pretty extensively for a new backpack for work - a purchase my employer would eventually make on my behalf. For many days after, I kept seeing ads for backpacks, even though I had never intended to make the purchase myself, and even though I already had a new backpack now. Obviously, automation has its flaws.

But, as the above-linked article (and the embedded TED Talk at that link) suggest, the flaws of a personalized web go far beyond mere retail annoyances. The customized internet experience actually has a perspective-narrowing effect, and may in fact cause us to be more polarized because we exist in more and more of a philosophical echo-chamber.

This is also something I have noticed as I've perused my Facebook feed, as I am in the habit of paying attention to trends and consciously seeking out opposing viewpoints. I call it competitor research. I need to know what kind of crazy things the opposition is saying, just to get a better contextual analysis of the big picture. I'm not afraid of hearing their ridiculous opinions, even if they are often so aggravating. It's useful information, for the most part, and I want to at least have the option to be exposed to it.

That's something I've noticed about my Twitter feed - I intentionally have a much more diverse set of people I follow there than I do on Facebook. It's easier to take the drivel in 140-character chunks, I guess. And Twitter seems so much more impersonal. I can lurk a-plenty without engaging very much (at least, that's the way I use it...YMMV).

That said, I endorse the general tenor of the link above, with the following minor disagreement: the author laments the decline of TV news viewership and newspaper readership, while I applaud it. Google "spoon-feeding" me personalized results is preferable to being spoon-fed a bunch of crap from a handful of MSM sources. At least with the web, I can still find opposing viewpoints if I search hard enough. Not so much the case with the legacy media.

Anyway, I find this all very interesting, and in some ways, a little scary for those not paying attention to the big picture. After all, ones and zeros cannot think, and should not be given free-reign to do all our thinking for us. Nor should the programmers behind those ones and zeroes, regardless of how well-intentioned they may be.