5 Ugly Truths About Big Tech

There has been a growing backlash against the “Big Technology” companies. As we continue to experience increasing political polarization, and with the persistent spread of both mis/disinformation since the pandemic, this burgeoning “techlash” will likely continue. For instance, the Pew Research Center recently reported that a growing number of concerns among users include: intrusion of privacy, misinformation campaigns, and cybersecurity risks (West, 2021). Trust in technology is reportedly at 57 percent among Americans surveyed last year, in contrast to 78 percent in 2012 (West, 2021).

Big Tech companies that dominate our consumer experiences when using digital devices include the Metaverse—formally known as Facebook—which also owns Instagram and WhatsApp, Google (which also owns YouTube), Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft. Facebook, in particular, has an outsized influence when we navigate online because two out of the three platforms with the most active users come from its platforms.

Below is my list of Top 5 facts regarding user experience that creators of Big Tech don’t want us to know:

Technology is not neutral

It is perhaps the most persistent mythology perpetuated by these companies, that technology itself is neutral and it is what we do with our devices and on digital spaces that impact whether its effects are positive or not. Such a mantra is problematic in that it places the burden on individual users regarding their experiences online, so that if a user becomes radicalized, the creators of the digital spaces that contributed to this process of radicalization are able to diffuse any responsibility. Moreover, when looking at the pivotal role that algorithms play in determining our experiences on any digital space, the notion of neutrality is laughable.

First, the Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) that drives algorithms is rooted in history, biases, disparities, and other problems. For a great analysis of the ways that implicit biases promoting sexism, racism, and other disparities between groups is rooted in A.I., I direct readers to the now-Netflix-available documentary Coded Bias.

Social media platforms oftentimes cater their algorithms in ways that generate more engagement—and hence profitability—which supersedes other concerns, such as the accuracy of what a user is exposed to, or how users feel, by the content that is higher on their feed or they are directed towards.

The Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen similarly presented internal documents that revealed content that triggered anger in users generated more engagement, even when users were surveyed after exposure to such content and reported not liking the content. Such practices have also impacted Facebook’s policy regarding how much they charge advertisers for their content. For exposure to the findings Haugen released, I refer readers to the Wall Street Journal articles collectively entitled “The Facebook Files,” many of them by Horowitz (2021).

Social Media Platforms like Facebook are Subsidizing Hate. As an extension of the first harsh truth, this translates to prominent social media platforms essentially amplifying and inciting hate speech for profit. This fact is explicitly acknowledged by insiders within Facebook. For instance, one of the documents released by the whistleblower bluntly identifies: “We have evidence from a variety of sources that hate speech, divisive political speech, and misinformation on Facebook and the family of apps are affecting societies around the world” (as quoted by Cranz & Brandom, 2021, para. 7).

Haugen claims the root of the problem are the algorithms rolled out in 2018 that govern what you see on the platform. According to her, they are meant to drive engagement and the company has found that the best engagement is the kind that instills fear and hate in users (Cranz & Brandom, 2021, para. 8).

Such findings are directly related to what groups dominate leadership in Big Tech, in addition to significantly impacting the psychology of users when they are on their digital devices.

Silicon Valley Has a Hostile Culture Towards Women and Minorities. Perhaps unsurprisingly, women and other minorities are underrepresented in Big Tech. Men hold approximately 76 percent of jobs in tech, with 95 percent of the tech workforce being white (Change, 2018). This disparity in representation across sex and gender and other important demographics has created an environment in Silicon Valley that often promotes toxic masculinity, and is unwelcome to women and other minorities. This has huge implications for the biases embedded in the A.I. that determines algorithms, as only about 15 percent of those working in A.I. are women.

Moreover, women leave jobs in tech two times as much as their male peers, and the pay gap for computer programming is five times bigger between the sexes than in other industries (Chang, 2018). The disparities are even worse when looking at women of color (WOC) and other minority groups. Such disparities continue to perpetuate themselves, as Big Tech oftentimes sees the same leaders or influencers moving from one platform or position to the other. For instance, the vast majority of venture capitalists, who significantly influence what tech ventures are financially supported, are men, and they tend to fund male-led companies (Chang, 2018).

Media Essential Reads

Do Celebrities Make Ads More Effective?

The Often Overlooked Positive Side of Social Media

The lack of representation of women and other minority groups at the highest echelons of power in Big Tech translates to the user experience, with the sites that harbor the most vicious trolls and harassment of women also being those started by white males. Everything from the size of our digital gadgets to the default bodies that are used as templates for what constitutes “health” on apps or an average face have been built at a size and scale catered to and better suited for male users.

Social Media Use Is Bad for Mental Health. One of the more publicized findings from Haugen’s disclosures was that insiders within Facebook had research substantiating that using Instagram was harmful for teenage girls’ mental health, but that no measures were put in place to protect them.

For the past three years, Facebook has been conducting studies into how its photo-sharing app Instagram affects its millions of young users. Repeatedly, the company’s researchers found that Instagram is harmful for a sizable percentage of them, most notably teenage girls. "We make body image issues worse for one in three teen girls," said one slide from 2019, summarizing research about teen girls who experience the issues. "Teens blame Instagram for increases in the rate of anxiety and depression," said another slide. (Wells, Horwitz, & Seetharaman, 2021, para. 6-8).

In fact, such a finding directly contradicts testimony Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg himself gave during Congressional hearings.

Big Tech Spends a Lot of Money Lobbying Congress to Promote Its Interests. Ahead of the "techlash," Big Tech leaders have been lobbying Congress to prevent any meaningful regulations or changes to the way they do business. The Washington Post—ironically, now owned by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos—reports that in 2021, the seven biggest technology companies spent $70 million lobbying Congress, which exceeds the amount they had spent the year before (Zakrzewski, 2022). In fact, the article goes on to identify that Big Tech is now spending roughly three times what it used to on lobbying Congress, making it one of the most influential industries (Zakrzewski, 2022).

With all of these harsh truths stacked against consumers of technology, is it really fair to say that the problems in tech can merely be solved by holding individual users responsible for what they do online?