---
# System prepended metadata

title: How to understand the power relations between social media AI corporations and their users?

---

# How to understand the power relations between social media AI corporations and their users?
Task:
1. Depict the insights into how power is distributed between the two, also distinguishing between different kind of users (individual end-users, but also other organizations such as universities, states, companies).
2. You could explain the reasons for these power asymmetries.
3. Building on former point, you could propose possibilities for changing these power asymmetries.

## Methods of power shift
1. advertisement to special group and leaving others out [6]
2. populist behavior of politicians to their own benefit [1]
3. spreading false news and conspiracy [1]
4. targeted message for people of the same interest. [6]
5. journalist freedom of post (recently restricted) Germany rule of posts fine up to 40 mil

## Different kinds of end users:

- individuals
- public (political) figures, governments
- activists
- whistle-blowers
- journalism[8]
- companies
- universities

## Power shifts:

**from (local) news organizations to social media corporations**

- Advertising is dominated by online media, local newspapers run out of income sources. [1]
- News are consumed more and more through social media channels. News organizations have to rely on the social media algorithms to be seen. [1]

**from individual users to social media corporations**

- "big data" / algorithmic surveillance: computational processing and transformation of large data-set into sensitive outputs, often invisibly and without consent [2]
- "filter bubble": Users are steered by online media. "The user becomes the content", he only gets those contents displayed by the algorithm that he is interested in anyway. [1]

**from individual users to companies, governments etc.**

- adversarial machine learning: Scraping social media profiles for user images

**from public figures (e.g. politicians, celebrities etc.) to social media corporations**

- new "attention economy": You have to participate in social media if you want to remain a figure of public interest. [1]
- more media channels, less control over how information reaches your audience. [1]

**from organizations to individuals**

- "broadcast yourself": Users get the capacity to create their own highly individualized media ecosystems. [1]
(Still, their scope largely depends on the algorithm's favor.)
- minorities can organize themselves. e.g. Fridays for future: Teenagers who've never been taken seriously before were able to gather with the help of social media.
(Downside: Extremists with anti-democratic views.) [1]

## Possibilities to change power shifts
We close with an exploration of how power can be shifted back to the users.

- technically: obfuscation filters against adversarial machine learning [2]
- socially: empower minorities to mobilize themselves over social media [2]
- socially: education of users on deciding how much risk they are willing to tolerate with sharing content online [2]
- legally: algorithmic and process audits that identify the harms caused by algorithmic decision making and also identify the systemic issues in the software development process [3]
- liberatory design practices which enable the development of software products center the aspirations and requirements of marginalized community members [3]
info on liberatory design: [https://uxdesign.cc/an-introduction-to-liberatory-design-9f5d3fe69ff9](https://uxdesign.cc/an-introduction-to-liberatory-design-9f5d3fe69ff9)

## Social media conflicts and effects in society

## Literature (Bibtex format)
[1] #anna #shahed
@article{taras2019power,
  title={Power Shift? Political Leadership and Social Media},
  author={Taras, David},
  year={2019},
  publisher={Routledge}
}

[2] #anna
@article{sauvik2020subversive,
  title={Subversive AI: Resisting automated algorithmic surveillance with         human-centered adversarial machine learning},
  author={Sauvik, Das},
  year={2020}
}

[3] #anna
@article{earl2020towards,
  title={Towards an Abolitionist’s AI: the role of HBCUs},
  author={Earl, Charles},
  year={2020}
}

[4] #ionelia
@article{akram2017study,
  title={A study on positive and negative effects of social media on society},
  author={Akram, Waseem and Kumar, Rekesh},
  journal={International Journal of Computer Sciences and Engineering},
  volume={5},
  number={10},
  pages={347--354},
  year={2017}
}

[5] #Shahed Masoudian
@article{akram2017study,
  title={Power relations in social media discourse: Dialogization and monologization on
corporate Facebook pages},
  author={Ella Lillqvista, Leena Louhiala-Salminenb and Anne Kankaanrantac},
  journal={Discourse, Context & Media},
  year={2015}
}


[7] #ionelia
@misc{website:mercycorps.org,
      author = "Robbins, Corina, and Mercy Corps",
      title = "The Weaponization of Social Media",
      month = "November",
      year = "2019",
      url = "https://www.mercycorps.org/research-resources/weaponization-social-media"
}


Siddiqui, Shabnoor, and Tajinder Singh. "Social media its impact with positive and negative aspects." International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and Research 5.2 (2016): 71-75.

[8] Shahed Masoudian
@article{suciu2018credibility,
  title={Credibility and freedom of choice in social media in relation with traditional media},
  author={Suciu, Ionuț and others},
  journal={Journal of Media Research-Revista de Studii Media},
  volume={11},
  number={32},
  pages={24--34},
  year={2018},
  publisher={Accent Publisher}
}

Proof Sources from News and websites: 
 
[8.1] news about a boy who livestreamed protest on web because of mistrust on traditional media.
Burks, T. (August 19, 2014). The Unlikely Student Behind Ferguson’s Most Important Livestream”, Good. Retrieved from https://www.good.is/articles/poli-sci-stu
dent-ferguson-livestream (accessed on Jan 15, 2021).

[8.2] SEAN, (JULY 30, 2019) Do Facebook Ads Work? (110% Yes & Here’s Proof)




<details close>
<summary><mark>Notes [7]:</mark>The Weaponization of Social Media</summary>
<p>
Social media has emerged as a powerful tool for communication, connection, community and, unfortunately, conflict. It’s created new, highly accessible channels for spreading disinformation, sowing divisiveness and contributing to real-world harm in the form of violence, persecution and exploitation. The impact social media has on real-world communities is complex and rapidly evolving. It stretches across international borders and challenges traditional humanitarian aid, development and peacebuilding models. 

SM have direct impact when it comes to conflict weather the conflict it's from the user, or government or form the corporations. Those are some case studies that mery corps, and non-profit organization (about cyber peace world), found among the society:
**Information operations (IO)**: Coordinated disinformation campaigns are designed to disrupt decision making, erode social cohesion and delegitimize adversaries in the midst of interstate conflict. IO tactics include intelligence collection on specific targets, development of inciteful and often intentionally false narratives and systematic dissemination across social and traditional channels. The Russian government used such tactics to portray the White Helmets humanitarian organization operating in Syria as a terrorist group, which contributed to violent attacks against the organization.
**Political manipulation (PM)**: Disinformation campaigns can also be used to systematically manipulate political discourse within a state, influencing news reporting, silencing dissent, undermining the integrity of democratic governance and electoral systems, and strengthening the hand of authoritarian regimes. These campaigns play out in three phases: 1) the development of core narratives, 2) onboarding of influencers and fake account operators, and 3) dissemination and amplification on social media. As an example, the president of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, used Facebook to reinforce positive narratives about his campaign, defame opponents and silence critics. 
**Digital hate speech (DHS)**: Social media platforms amplify and disseminate hate speech in fragile contexts, creating opportunities for individuals and organized groups to prey on existing fears and grievances. They can embolden violent actors and spark violence — intentionally or sometimes unwittingly. The rapid proliferation of mobile phones and Internet connectivity magnifies the risks of hate speech and accelerates its impacts. Myanmar serves as a tragic example, where incendiary digital hate speech targeting the majority Muslim Rohingya people has been linked to riots and communal violence.
**Radicalization & recruitment (RR)**: The ability to communicate across distances and share usergenerated, multimedia content inexpensively and in real time have made social media a channel of choice for some violent extremists and militant organizations, as a means of recruitment, manipulation and  MERCY CORPS The Weaponization of Social Media: How social media can spark violence and what can be done about it 3 coordination. The Islamic State (ISIS) has been particularly successful in capitalizing on the reach and power of digital communication technologies.
</p>
</details>


<details close><summary><mark>Notes [4]:</mark> A study on positive and negative effects of social media on society</summary>
<p>
Social media is a term used to describe the interaction between groups or individuals in which they produce, share, and sometimes exchange ideas, images, videos and many more over the internet and in virtual communities.  Social network is transforming the behavior in which cooporations relate with poeple, how people relate to coorporations, and how people relate with other groups, like educational instututions, families and peers.

Social networking sites can assist young people to become more socially capable. Social media is a web-based form of data communication. Social media platforms allow users to have conversations, share information and create web content. Social media has different forms, together with blogs, micro-blogs, wikis, social networking sites, photo-sharing sites, instant messaging, video-sharing sites, podcasts, widgets, virtual worlds, and more. Billions of people around the world use social media to share information and make connections. Social Media is a innovative idea with a very brilliant
opportunity with additional scope for advancements.

A. Positive Effect of Social Media on Business
 With the use of Social Media, It is better to understand the customer requirements.
 Social Media helps in promoting the Business all over the World.
 Social Media builds deals and client maintenance through standard connection and auspicious client benefit.
 Social Media provides rich customer experiences.
 With Social media monitoring you can gain key information about your competitors.
 With the help of social media, Sharing contents about the Business faster and easier.
 Social networking sites helps to make new customers by providing various facilities.
 It helps to increase market insight and expand out beyond your rivals with online networking.
 It also helps to increase awareness among customers for better understanding of products.
B. Negative Effect of Social Media on Business
 In business, Social Media isn't totally hazard free in light of the fact that a significant number of the fans and supporters are allowed to post their feeling on a specific association; the negative remark can lead the association to disappointment.
 Negative customer reviews are harmful.
 Highly time consuming.
 The web is crowded with more and more content.
 A mistake made on social media is hard to rectify.
 Many of the substantial association have succumbed to the programmers.
 The wrong online brand system can fate an organization, and put at a tremendous viral social drawback.
 Getting included with Social Media is extremely time consuming. As an association you ought to appoint a man to dependably support your pages and profile with noteworthy substance.
 Most organizations experience issues measuring the consequences
</p>
</details>

<details close>
<summary><mark>Notes [8]:</mark>Credibility and freedom of choice in social media in relation with traditional media</summary>
<p>
purpose of research is to analyze how algorithms used by social networks allow different forms of misuse.

SUMMARY:
Just as with traditional media, social networks allow their users a certain selection of information, giving them the choice of the pages they follow. On the one hand, the emergence, development and influence of social media is beneficial because it raises any kind of informational embargo that could be put on the press or through the press. On the other hand, there is another risk - that social networks get to control the distribution of news.The frequent changes to the most popular social network algorithms have led to a decrease of popularity of the posts from public institutions or public persons in favor of paid posts. In this case, the idea that the user selects the information he receives and the pages he gets the news from tends to become more and more an illusion.
end Summary 


important Notes:
The liberalization of the access of information to the general public has reduced the control exercised by politicians and authorities on the media. There is a judgment that journalists are finally free because they no longer depend on media owners and the public has new options generated by these networks.
But all these seemingly free benefits also come with a price for users. The use of these services also brings with them supervision from the giants who own the social networks. Every article read (and even unread) by a user says something about his profile, becomes a source of information. The location and time of the network connection are relevant, such as any movement made on these platforms, from a newsfeed scroll to posting a text, photo, or article.

theoretically, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube and all social networks have become viable alternatives for the press that provides information at any time and in any form of presentation. Only the information that reaches each user through social networks is selected by some algorithms which are not made public.

the lack of confidence in mass media was one of the reasons why people turned their attention on alternatives offered by social media.It is good evidence that social networks can be a useful instrument against censorship and that freedom of expression has reached limits unimaginable so far.(burks,2014)[cited from a different article]. 
however an indepth view of the issue reveals that only the traditional media that spread the news is replaced with gigantic tech companies that are able to give targeted message (of course not for free). 

literally hundreds of ways to target people. Keep in mind that you can use any combination of the targeting methods listed below. some of the ways are : Location, Demographic(age,sex,etc), interest, Behavior , engagement, partnet connection (e.g for an advertisment for a car you can target the ones who applied for car load) and Automatic Optimization(automatics algorithm)

the question with these social media platform is that how can a news room or journalist be sure that the news they are puttig in these platforms would reach the users  and they are not lost among bilions of other posts existing in those platforms ?

Cambridge Analatica Scandal Proved personal data is exchange money:

1. Facebook data processed to send sponsored post to users in order to appeal to emotions and to convince them, by using their interests and needs.

a. The services have been used in campaigns such as the presidential elections in the US and Nigeria or the Brexit referendum

b.A study by social media analytics provider Quintly proves that Facebook favors videos uploaded directly to their own platform, to the detriment of those posted on other platforms. The study, conducted in the second half of 2016, analyzed over six million posts and over 167,000 Facebook profiles. In the first five months, videos uploaded directly on the Facebook platform raised an average of 110% more interactions and 478% more distributions. The figures exploded in December, when the authors of the analysis suspect that Facebook changed the way algorithms work. In that month, videos uploaded directly to Mark Zuckerberg’s network gathered an average of 1055% more distributions than those on the YouTube platform (owned by Google’s rival) and 300% more interactions (Koetsier 2017).

c.“top fake election news stories generated more total engagement on Facebook than top election news stories from 19 major news outlets” (Silverman 2016) US election and Donald trump campain and the use of infamouse "super preditor" to convince black voter not to vote.

d.Facebook allowed advertisers to exclude specific groups of users by race. The social network gave the opportunity of excluding users by what it named “Ethnic Affinities”, although advertisements that exclude people on race, gender, or other sensitive factors are forbidden by law. In order to reach the above data, Pro Publica has also used some algorithms. They created a tool through which every Facebook user could easily find out the categories in which Facebook framed him (Angwin, Parris, Mattu 2016).

2.although discrimination against workers older than 40 years is forbidden in the recruitment process, dozens of companies have paid for sponsored ads on Facebook to recruit limited-age employees (Angwin, Scheiber, Tobin 2017)

3.Topics like “Jew hater,” “How to burn the jews,” or “Why jews ruin the world” could be set as areas of interest by anyone who wanted to have sponsored posts to the users they wanted to address to. (Angwin, Varner, Tobin 2017)

4.2018, A law that took effect in Germany on January 1st this year attacks what is considered to be “a hate speech on the internet.” The law, known as NetzDG, forces social networks to erase any post that is against German law. There are targeted specifically the social networking sites, and the proposed fines reach up to 60 million for networks that violate it. RISK : content removal and cencorship to avoid fine. 

5. bots able to generate false messages that can reach out up to 440milion (Update on Results of Retrospective Review of Russian-Related Election Activity, 2018).

</p>
</details>




<details close>
<summary><mark>Notes [9]:</mark>BloggerAsk  </summary>
<p>
AI Social Networks and Autonomous AI Agents  

SUMMARY:
Social media platforms powered by AI have significantly transformed power relations between corporations, users, governments, and organizations, particularly within [AI social networks and autonomous AI agents](https://www.bloggerask.com/ai-social-networks-autonomous-ai-agents/). These platforms concentrate power by controlling algorithms, data collection, and information distribution, while users provide content, attention, and personal data. Different user groups experience this power imbalance in distinct ways: individuals are subject to surveillance and filter bubbles; journalists and news organizations increasingly depend on platform algorithms for visibility; public figures and governments gain direct access to audiences but lose control over how messages are distributed; and activists and minorities can mobilize more effectively, though they also face risks of surveillance and misuse.

The rise of targeted advertising, algorithmic filtering, and data-driven persuasion has enabled political manipulation, the spread of misinformation, and exclusionary practices. Traditional media institutions have lost economic and editorial power as advertising revenue and news consumption shift toward social media platforms. At the same time, AI-driven systems enable governments, corporations, and other actors to exploit user data through adversarial machine learning and large-scale profiling.

To counter these power asymmetries, the article highlights technical, social, legal, and design-based solutions. These include privacy-enhancing and obfuscation technologies, user education and digital literacy, legal oversight through algorithmic audits, and liberatory design practices that center marginalized communities. While social media can empower individuals and minorities, meaningful power redistribution requires transparency, regulation, and user-centered approaches to AI system design.

</p>
</details>


