Myth: Facebook does harm by polarizing people
This article by Dr Piotr Wozniak is part of SuperMemo Guru series on memory, learning, creativity, and problem solving.
Myth
Facebook algorithms cause harm by polarizing people. Polarization leads to anger and hate
Fact
While regulators blame Facebook for hate and polarization, they should rather cherish polarization, and blame compulsory schooling for the hate factor
Group polarization
Facebook causes a great deal of wars and mud-slinging on the web. It has a reputation for polarizing people and causing anger. Facebook algorithms favor engagement. This means that if a post is causing a lot of stir, it is likely to surface among others. If a comment angers a great deal of people, it will be favored. As a result, Facebook discussions are jam-packed with heat and anger. In consequence, some regulators have appetites to curb that source of negative emotion and silence Facebook by emasculating it of its agitating intelligence. As it is often the case in a well-schooled society, the wrong culprit is blamed for wrong reasons. What Facebook algorithms do is extremely useful in the global discourse. We should look at how things get done in the brain, and follow brain's example. Group polarization on Facebook is analogous to the conceptualization process occurring in the brain (in development and during learning).
Competitive learning
The brain is a marvel of adaptation and intelligence. One of its powers is competitive learning, in which two concept maps activated with overlapping input will compete for dominance. The brain does not like to have two representations for the same thing. This is why it will engage in a violent competition between concept maps and individual neurons until a clear representation emerges. If this process is taken far enough, the winning neuron may emerge as a grandmother cell, which can easily represent an input pattern as a single concept activation. The process in which concepts emerge in development and in learning has the form of conceptualization. Due to rapid cell, neurite and synapse turnover in development, competition between neurons will naturally lead to the elimination of some. This occurs in a healthy form of the war of the networks. In adulthood, such wars may disrupt control systems leading to depression, obesity, insomnia, addiction, aggression, and more.
Figure: Neuronal feedback loops in competitive decision making. Input patterns determine the input value (e.g. as computed by knowledge valuation network). Inhibitory neurons IA and IB decrease the chance of firing in the competitive decision neuron (Decision A or Decision B). History of prior decisions will determine synaptic stabilization, which will favor decisions that used to bring higher past rewards. See also: War of the networks, Competitive feedback loops in binary decision making at neuronal level, and Learn drive at school
Collective intelligence
In terms of information theory, a very similar process occurs in collective intelligence in which models of reality compete for dominance in a social group. In the process called group polarization, individual models crystallize and strengthen. Once the crystallization is complete, models clash and lead to the extinction of weaker ones. On occasion, competing models carve out their own niches and co-exist as entities sheltered by weakened communication. Facebook algorithms facilitate discussion, competitive learning, clash of models, group polarization, and the elimination of unviable models.
Blame school, not Facebook
It is not the algorithms that are guilty of all bad things that happen in the wake of Facebook wars. It is human nature. As often is the case, I blame school for most of bad side effects of Facebook discourse. On the list of 100 bad habits learned at school, many will affect the emotional outcomes of the combat of ideas. Bad problem solving habits will lead to meandering discussions and accusations of being illogical, biased, uneducated, or unscientific. Bad learning habits and strategies will hobble the knowledge of the participants and undermine the entire discourse. Among life habits, we will most acutely observe intolerance of diversity, disrespect for freedom, intolerance of impulsivity, political correctness, zero-sum gamesmanship, envy, worship of orderliness and perfect models. Among conditioned responses we will observe fear of looking foolish, and more. While anger and passion favor excited communication, they can also spill in personal abuse or, occasionally in violence, depression, addictions, and more.
Root cause of evil
We enter a more dramatic territory when we observe that social media may have contributed to Arab Spring or Myanmar genocide. In those cases, however, we need to see social media as the amplifier of reality. Social media accelerate the dissemination of information and accelerate the debate. The causes of unrest or hate are already in place. They are stoked up by social media indeed. However, social media only accelerate the existing process(es). Instead of blaming the media, we need to look at actual problems and seek remedy. Incidentally, I hope that social media will result in Student Spring 2022. A school strike that will end compulsory schooling. See: School reform: Evolution or revolution
Myth busting is an important mission at SuperMemo Guru. We tackle myths about memory, learning, creativity, SuperMemo, and incremental reading. Please write if you want a myth busted or if you disagree