[1] Famed entrepreneur, real estate developer, and former owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers Frank McCourt along with acclaimed journalist Michael Casey have written a book which aims to find a way for us to untangle a distorted digital ethos from a current messy reality. Most of us have heard and lamented the internet’s contribution to rising youth suicide rates, the toxic character of our politics, and our contentious social engagement with others. The authors contend that these aberrancies are functions of the digital age that rob us of our ability to communicate openly and truthfully with each other. They contend that the real problem is that digital platforms distort our behavior by robbing us of data which is rightfully ours. In their account, the internet, as it has been structured, encourages the secretive, centralized aggregation of massive troves of information generated by our daily online engagements. “That system has empowered a small group of tech companies and their clients to exert untold influence over us… In so doing… [these tech companies and their clients have] learned how to tap into our most basic instincts to engender the conditions that maximize our engagement with their only platforms and, by extension, their profits.” (pp.18-19) This results in the accumulation of the power of the internet in just a few hands (p.24).
[2] From my perspective the most profound reflection I can share is that the authors revelations lead to the conclusion that the algorithms of the present system maximize engagement when people are emotionally triggered (p.19). In other words, the algorithms addict us in order to manipulate our engagement, control our behavior, and overpower our wills (p.47). The authors share an admission of Facebook’s first president Sean Parker where he confesses that the site’s success was built on the addictive character of “likes” (p.154). There is a perception among many today that life is being controlled by these digital platforms (p.50). It is certain and clear that we voluntarily hand our information whenever we log into these platforms and those who control these systems have the ability to manipulate us (p.31).
[3] McCourt has offered a solution to our present predicament with the development of Project Liberty, an effort aimed at building a better web experience. The organization is developing the Decentralized Social Networking Protocol in an attempt at allowing people to be in control of their own data. Rather than surrendering authority over one’s data to these private companies when logging on, their power would be restrained by allowing for said data to remain in the hands of the individual (pp.70-71). The DSNP server combined with a Decentralized Identifier or DID’s (a digital passport that identifies the user without using a centralized corporate or governmental authority) allows an individual to have control over their personal information securely, accurately and privately.
[4] Certainly not all platforms will migrate to the DSMP or DID’s system of identification, and the implementation of these will be a challenge, but the possibility to change and reform the current system exists. Nevertheless, the reverse engineering of all the profit-making addictive driven systems currently in place needs to be undertaken (p.86). The authors make clear that we will need to find better ways to make the internet function with more empathy, less exploitation, and divisiveness (p.96). But the core idea is that once we own our own data, we might have a resource, along with others, that could be marketed to the big internet companies as a means to achieve their financial and social advantage more responsibly (pp.113-115,156-157).
[5] In order to change the internet in this direction we will also need to change Washington. The authors make clear how companies like Amazon, Microsoft, Open AI, Apple, among others, have purchased a lot of politicians through campaign donations and legalized bribery (p.144). McCourt and Casey also contend that what we need is sweeping legislation today; not unlike the Telecommunications Act of 1996 which broke down the Baby Bells’ regional monopolies. They propose bills to mandate interoperability between internet platforms along with the mandate that consumers have full control and rights over all data in the course of their interactions. In addition they believe that ownership should be transferred to the individuals to whom the data originally belonged (pp.149-151). Other legislative safeguards and strictures prohibiting companies gaining and exploiting old data simply as a result of recent interaction, should be prohibited as well.
[6] Subsequently McCourt and Casey hypothesize that we would need to develop new systems by which people can freely and confidently connect whatever platform they choose. It is argued that this will be necessary in order to overcome the continuing dominance of the major providers over the privacy concerns of the consumer (p.152). The authors insist for the promotion of this vision, moral clarity, exciting stories of possibility and creative avenues for discourse need to be developed or else we will be doomed to the gloomy prophesy we are trapped in presently. Without change we will be perpetually caught in the prevailing model (pp.154-155).
[7] The authors close with a reflection on AI. They proffer the prevailing reflection on AI’s promise and its potential challenges. One important observation for Lutheran ethicists is the authors’ acknowledgement that the algorithms of AI are amoral, not capable of self-aware introspection (p.177). Thus as presently constituted, AI will not get us out of the problems and present structures analyzed in this book and about which many of us worry. But the authors’ optimism about changing our present internet system still reflects their call for finding the means to ensure that this system serve the broadest public good by ensuring all information shared is done so freely and fairly (pp.181-189).
[8] The book closes with an appeal to readers to envision a new internet, one characterized by features like personal identity, choice, property rights, portability, and authenticity (pp.194-196). These features will make it less vulnerable to information/identity theft, social discord, and algorithms that thrive on our worst instincts.
[9] There are clearly appealing features in McCourt’s model and we ought to heed his warning about our present situation, if not his solutions. But for me the big threat occasioned by internet technologies and the AI being developed is that they remain dependent on amoral algorithms. As ethicists and people of good faith, we need to explore ways of incorporating the better parts of our human nature, charged with ethics and spirituality, into our technology. Until we succeed, people of faith and their allies, like McCourt, will need to develop methods of technology and profit orientations that do not rely on exploitation and adversarial online exchanges. We need to encourage check-and-balance models, that can regulate what transpires in the digital space lest we lose what is most essential to human community and our faith. From this context, the proposals advocated for in this book are worth a serious look.
