A freelance writer known to us once earned some money by writing web pages for a company that sold tiles. They wanted their site to show lots of recommendations from satisfied customers, so he sat down and wrote 1,000 personal recommendations in different names, from different towns. The tile company sold tiles, the author got paid. But how many people looking at their screen after a Google search actually bought tiles because they trusted those personal recommendations? Possibly not many, as we all know how that sort of thing works. Don’t we? Well, it might be worth checking.
Most people assume that Google is a source of ‘facts’ from sites like Wikipedia, written by people who know their subject and tell the truth. In fact, you can build an interesting picture of a society by analysing Google searches (n1) to see what people worry about. But checking on the reliability of that source may not occur to them. After all, if you can’t ask Google, who can you ask?
So how can we treat the ‘facts’ and ideas released into the internet? Who releases them and why? That is a BIG question. It is often argued that Trump became president of the USA partly because of social media influence managed by friends on right wing news sites.(n2) It is even argued that Russia is hacking into Western sites to influence elections. Extremist groups are said to spread messages of hate through social media to try to get the population to accept their ideas. (n3)
This works partly by manipulating what is known as the Overton Window.
The Overton Window is named after Joseph P. Overton, who pointed out that people can accept new ideas only within a limited range of their existing opinions. Anything outside that range cannot be accepted.
Overton window | ||
Existing opinions and ideas | ||
extreme
ridiclous impossible |
might agree —–will agree — might agree | extreme
ridiclous impossible |
If you started in the year 1800 and argued in favour of votes for women it would be outside the Overton Window of most people in the UK. Slowly, the window moved and it became thinkable, then accepted, then valued. So if you want to bring in a new idea you may need to move that window, nudge it along a little. There are three connected ideas here.
1) The combined effect of many small nudges from many sources may eventually move people’s Overton windows and make an idea acceptable. Messages on social media can be spread by the thousand using robot systems, gently dropping hints and nudges, targeted at potential supporters using data from other sites that captured our preferences, buying habits, opinions etc ( n4). The process can be hardly noticed but very effective. It is not unusual for racist groups, who would be denied access to someone’s Overton window in ordinary argument, to post snide comments, jokes, fake statistics and news stories to slowly poison the atmosphere and nudge the window along, so eventually racism becomes more acceptable in day-to-day conversation.
2) The centre ground is a modern myth. It is common to hear words like moderate and centre used approvingly and extremist disapprovingly, but who decides where the centre is located. The government of Margaret Thatcher was remarkable in many ways and one of them was the way it shifted the Overton Window to the right. Previously mainstream conservatives became ‘wet’ and were cast out. Moderate union leaders became ‘extremists’. Tony Blair inherited that window and instead of moving it back again he accepted the new limitations and tried to fit the Labour party into it, so the left moved to the right in order to look more like moderates and less like extremists. In 2016 the window started to move back again, but the centre ground in the UK is still a lot further to the right that it is in most other Western European countries. Modern voters are just not aware of it.
3) When people are offered information they will believe it if they want to and not if they don’t. Its ‘truth value’ often counts less than its value in confirming their own prejudices. That is why we need also to look at psychology, logic and syllogism
notes:
1 – https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/09/everybody-lies-how-google-reveals-darkest-secrets-seth-stephens-davidowitz
2 – http://time.com/4783932/inside-russia-social-media-war-america/
3 – https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/01/far-right-networks-nationalists-hate-social-media-companies
4 – You will have noticed that Amazon and Facebook know what you buy and what you like. Detailed information about you is for sale to people seeking votes or influence.