The appearance of a printing machine in Europe of the 15th century produced a revolution, helping to extend the information unprecedented before the pace. It indirectly contributed to the rapid development of democracy and the enlighquality of people around the world. In the current era of the social network are a similar shift of the paradigm.
They play a crucial role in promoting content related to issues that have a great influence on public opinion and democratic processes. Enhanced democracy, they at the same time can provoke the occurrence of anarchy due to the unregulated nature of fake news and their role in their distribution.
Internet communities help convey information and unite for solving public tasks, pushing to find solutions. Taking into account this function, they are gradually perceived as the fifth power. Even more than power. We could observe such an effect quite recently when Twitter was able to move the President of the US President Donald Trump.
Political figures are increasingly using social platforms for everyday communication to ensure direct and direct communication with voters. Among the detrimental impacts of online groups should be called the strengthening of marginal trends: the populist style of publications allows you to inflame hatred, extremist statements, especially in regional languages that are difficult to control in digital space.
The technological capabilities of social networks made possible self-lifting and personalization of perceived information. There is a so-called group polarization phenomenon, when like-minded people talk to each other and, ultimately, come up with a more radical version of what they thought before they began to talk.
This is not consistent with the ideal of democracy, which is based on debates, disagreements and discussions. The growth of the polarizing and causing disagreement of the content has become a determining point in modern policies. The spread of fake among groups with a low or zero level of critical digital literacy is a big problem. People believe any news, do not even think to double-check it.
Cyber refucing or trolling. Another dangerous element is to hang out labels and the branding of those who do not agree with the actions of the government or a dominant public opinion as «anti-people». It is necessary to develop critical thinking and information literacy to allow citizens to distinguish the truth and lies and understand when democratic processes are subjected to manipulation.
As for the positive aspect, social platforms can provide protection in the event of a deliberate violation of democratic processes or the spread of malicious lies: they will help people find out what is true, and what is not. But this process requires a fine tuning, as it can be completely solved by prohibitions and locks.
We hope that our usual social networks will exist and develop further. But the regulatory work will be carried out so that no one else uses their capabilities for mercenary purposes. In general, ideally, social networks should be controlled by the people themselves, not even by the state. For this, the folk control authority should appear.
Its task would be to track the conference harmful people and direct appeal to the Representative Office of Social Networks. If we are a democratic society, then the people themselves must be a participant and responsible person for the informational health of the nation.