Online, I wear someone else’s clothes. Every day, I become more like the girl the internet wanted me to be. Every day, I form opinions based on content and ideas I consumed when I was not present. Now what?
Like most of us, I was always fascinated by the idea of truth. By definition, we will never get there, and I find the pursuit of looking for it beautiful as a general concept. Perhaps it was important to me because I was raised in a family that didn’t communicate, so I became obsessed with figuring out what silence meant. My parents are academics who value evidence and the scientific method; they constantly sought evidence, while I loved exploring the depth of my mind and imagination. I could trick my mind into believing anything. Luckily, I’ve found myself somewhere between these two camps as I grew older. I learned to appreciate the value of evidence as a tool to make sense of the world and to critique assumptions without emotional involvement.
There is something beautiful about being committed to truth-seeking and integrity. It sure is easier to accept everything at face value.
Searching for evidence
Working in the tech world over the last few years, I have spent a lot of time reflecting on what truth and evidence mean. When working in venture capital, I searched for evidence supporting my thesis a company would succeed even if I had no data to rely on. At TikTok, we had to figure out how to identify and deal with false or half-true content. Unfortunately, the internet is messy, and misinformation and fake realities flourish wherever you look. In every #tok-corner, you’ll find questionable facts and alternative realities. This is also why these apps are so exciting, you suddenly have access to the entire world!
Fake and misleading information are effective tools for economic or political gains, and for influencing others. While this is not a new conversation, it continuously deserves attention because the way we consume content changes, and the reason we are using platforms too. For instance, we started using social media to connect with people we knew but now rely on the platforms as a primary source of news and information. As the use cases change, we must constantly remind ourselves of the value of this conversation since a shift in use cases means a shift in risk levels and new unintended consequences.
Little drops of water make the mighty ocean
Like content policy, things become challenging when it’s not explicit or easy to identify what we are looking for, which in this case would be inaccurate information. There are so many half-truths roaming around online, and platforms can’t control every piece of content. Information might be sort of untrue but not like fake enough to be picked up by the platforms or third-party fact-checkers. So instead, over time, we feed our brains with half-truths and over-exaggerations, and even if they are just a little bit exaggerated, every day, over time, they will slowly turn into opinions and worldviews. We don’t know how we got there, but our perception of a topic or the world has shifted. It used to be easy to remember where and in what context we picked up new knowledge, but now, not so much.
People already know that not everything they see online is true. We know we should be critical when seeing facts and reading news stories. But what about the more subtle truths being pushed to us that shape our opinion, identity, and worldview? All those tiny little things we feed our brains with every day? How do we measure the impact and influence of all those small components on our minds? And is it any different from governments and media pushing their agendas onto people? Probably not. But then again, maybe?
I am 28, and I can’t always separate facts from fiction.
Reactive vs. proactive approaches
Reading some of the platforms’ policies on tackling misinformation, it seems most rely on a mix of a proactive and reactive approach. In this case, a proactive approach could involve third-party fact-checkers before users report it. The reactive approach would rely on users flagging content as false information, and content would then be marked for another review. As a crisis unfolds in the world, no one knows precisely what is happening or what information is true or false. For platforms, it can be challenging to rely on proactive measurements as they risk silencing content that is essential information for people to see, especially now as platforms like TikTok and Instagram are used as the primary source of news/information. At the same time, a reactive approach can lead to platforms enabling fake information about a world event to spread. Platforms could put all content that mentions a specific keyword about the situation for review, but moderation would slow down, and users would be frustrated. When working at TikTok, we would see these kinds of trade-offs often. I still don’t know how to fix this.
Fact, opinion, or fiction?
Facts are easy to validate if presented as facts, but online culture is shifting, and people now want authentic and personal content. We reject the idea of perfectly curated feeds. So, more than ever, we see facts presented as original personal stories. In addition, we can become attached to the people we follow; seeing the same person over and over builds up trust and a sense of familiarity, which can become a dangerous fallacy. On top of that, what if that person has lots of followers and/or credentials? What if the person speaks clear English, articulates well, and looks powerful? We can add so many fallacies and biases into the mix, and with the speed and rate we are consuming content today, we no longer stop, pause, or reflect on what we just saw.
Criticizing becomes very difficult, regardless if you are inherently critical or not. It seems things become true through consensus and not evidence.
Sometimes, I need to ask myself, do I know who I am, what I believe, and why?
Do you?