Social Media Imperialism

Ifeoluwa Siddiq Oyelami

 Perhaps no one would have expected the first days of 2021 to go uneventful. The technology world was stunned at two different news: The suspension of US president from major social media platforms and WhatsApp’s new privacy policy debatable. Even though, the news appears parallel, they may have several points of intersection.

            Donald Trump was until a few days ago, one of the most influential politicians on social media and the “father of social media bureaucracy”. He has been fired from social media as he continues to question the credibility of election that is taking him out of the white house. Tech giants including Facebook, Twitter, and Google banned him from using their various platforms because some of his posts were considered to have triggered his supporters to violate the US congress building. The matter became worse for American first citizen when Parler, a social media app where he sought refuge was pulled down by Amazon.

            In the other part of the world, things may not be so fine for Facebook inc. after it ordered WhatsApp users around the world to either accept changes in its Terms of Service and privacy policy by February 8 or their accounts will be deleted. The policy in question entails some key changes, which will enable WhatsApp to collect and share users' information with Facebook, its parent company, in a data unification drive by the tech giant. The controversial policy has led a worldwide protest against Whatsapp, with a lot of people deleting the mobile app and “migrating” to alternative apps. In fact, in countries like Turkey and Pakistan legal actions are being considered.

            These two cases suggesting tech giant impunities have once again raised some of the social media questions. Are these platforms monopolized? Are we free? Is social media threatening at all? How powerful are the tech firms that own the platforms?

For starters, in Trump bans case, except some prominent individuals like the German chancellor Angela Merkel, a lot of people saw it in the light of the biblical proverb - spare of the rod and spoil the child. Even though the censorship case ought to be a matter of concern for the international communities.  Like the Turkish adage states, “mock not your neighbour it may befall you too”, should we be worried that the tech giants will come for us too one day, for flimsy excuses, especially as they keep widening the meaning of concepts like “hate speech”. 

            It seems the world is heading towards an oligarchy of western liberal tech giants. In the first decade of the 21st century, there was a breath of relieve for everyone, against the heavily regularised and limited conventional press. It was thought that everyone could get themselves a voice, but it seems that may not be here for so long anymore.  Already a lot of posts are brought down for political correctness, creating a barrier for freedom of speech.

            Yes, freedom of speech is guaranteed to a large extent on social media, but it appears it all depends on the dictates of tech oligarchs. Today, while Twitter is blocking propaganda of so-called “American domestic terrorists” it has kept several PKK-linked accounts, which insight violence against Turkey. Interestingly, its CEO Jack Dorsey did not only allow his platform to be the primary driver of a political protest in Nigeria last year, but he also directly supported it, even when the protest led to the destructions of private and public properties.

            In the same vein, Facebook has severally been accused of similar acts. Meddling in elections and interior affairs, indirectly supporting Islamophobia, and Zionist propaganda are but some of its usual controversy. But then, no government takes on the firm except it is declared dictatorial.

Just like the totalitarian control of information and opposition censorship, mandatory personal data sharing policies are not signs of progress. Firms like Facebook are on the verge of optimizing their algorithm, so they seriously need people’s information. Of course, a perfect algorithm is a lot of prospects for the tech companies. Numerous surveys have shown that markets have made a drastic switch from traditional advertising to digital advertising. Thanks to personality-tailored ads! If this were a game, the common man would have been declared the loser because there will be an increase in crazy consuming culture, with relatively low production.

The politics and economics aside, it is scary to note that our deen is even at stake in the whole discourse. In the aftermath of 9/11, Muslims and Islam were targets of the conventional media, although, the popularity of social media might not have changed the Islamophobic rhetoric, it is hardly unnoticeable that the social media promotes a liberal version of Islam which Graham Fuller termed “American version” among Muslim youth. One cannot help but think that these and similar shenanigans are some forms of personality tailored. Yet again, thanks to our personal and collective data!

In the light of these, especially as available alternatives are mostly opportunists, and “angels we don’t know” can the Muslim community come up with more responsible and healthy digital platforms?

Yes, perhaps it is time to have a rethink on what we consume in the digital world. We may not continue to depend on these social media platforms. At least, they may not be handy always. Perhaps, it is time to invest more into ethical technology. However, it appears that none of the D8 countries nor the OIC countries is a proud host of a viable operating system, despite their human and material resources. The world still depends mainly on western OS’s with hope to split China’s prospects. So, what if we create more local and healthy social media platforms, aren’t their hosting going to be at the mercy of the west tech industry?

What we need is technology overhaul!