Category: social media

June – A month of notable events…

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Conflict, Defence, Information Technology, International Relations, Life, Security, social media

June is proving to be a month of notable events. So far there’s been the 82nd anniversary of D-Day, a horrific incident in Northern Ireland, the UK Defence Secretary’s resignation over Defence funding, the announcement that the UK is banning social media for under 16s, the SpaceX IPO, President Trump’s 80th birthday, and the conclusion of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the US and Iran. Apart from the D-Day anniversary, however, none of these events is a great advert for the underlying dynamics of today’s world.

It’s been obvious for years that UK Defence is behind the curve given modern threats, and that parents want action on social media. Many people think that an IPO which makes Elon Musk the planet’s first trillionaire is a cause for worry rather than celebration, and that the limits to US global dominance have been exposed by the conflict with Iran. A concluded MOU is not a comprehensive resolution. President Trump is now 80 and it looks as if his age and modus operandi may become his, and his country’s, Achilles heel. Others may have a different perspective, but all of these events have fed the sense of dislike in the way the world’s going that’s widespread amongst the general public.

Technology, one way or another, pervades all these events, and the UK Defence Secretary’s resignation and the ban on social media for under 16s are particular home turf items. The nature of warfare has changed, as is demonstrated daily in Ukraine and the Middle East, and more funding is needed to adapt and ensure UK readiness to address modern threats. The Defence Secretary resigned on realising there wasn’t going to be funding to an adequate level. Consequently, the government is now scrambling to demonstrate to the electorate that it takes defence of the realm seriously. Regardless of the availability of the right military equipment, our military seems ‘light’ for a country with 70 million people when all its personnel can fit into Wembley Stadium plus the Twickenham Rugby stadium with ~20,000 seats to spare.

The social media ban is a dramatic change in the government’s position. Why? Probably because its reluctance to upset President Trump and the US tech giants has been usurped by the Prime Minister’s need of a legacy as he is on an exit path! An unkind point, perhaps, but one likely veined with truth. Most people see the ban for under 16s as good news and they don’t care what President Trump, or the US tech giants, think because they are savvier about, and becoming more resistant to, the surveillance capitalism of social media giants and their unconstrained role in the AI race.

There’s plenty of opportunity for more notable events in the rest of June. Perhaps one will be Iran doing better than the USA in the World Cup. Time, as always, will tell…

Digital slop…

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Business, Information Technology, Life, social media, Technology

Over the years, the Badger’s been involved in company acquisitions, and he’s also been on the receiving end when his employer was itself acquired by another company. Experiencing both sides of the equation has been valuable and educational. Acquisitions normally follow standard processes. When the transaction is finally agreed and completed, the subsequent integration activities also follow fairly standard processes. This week the Badger was asked about his view on ‘digital slop’, and – oddly – this triggered a memory from way back in 1997 when the Badger attended a post-acquisition leaders conference following the purchase of a Dublin-based company in the telecommunications software market. This company had products in the short messaging services (SMS) sector, and the conference took place in a rural hotel in the Irish countryside some distance from the city.

Why did ‘digital slop’ trigger this particular memory? Probably because a memorable element of the conference was a presentation by a leader from the acquired company on their vision of the future for mobile phones and telecommunication software products. They described a vision of the future in which everyone had an internet-connected mobile phone which enticed them to enter a shop every time they walked past one in a shopping mall or on the High Street! It was an interesting presentation which occurred during the year of Amazon’s IPO, before Facebook existed, and shortly before Google was founded. Most conference attendees could see its technological feasibility, but most questioned why people would want to be bombarded with ‘marketing and adverts’ as they walked through a mall or along a High Street. Most, including the Badger, thought members of the public would say ‘I don’t need this, I don’t want this, and I don’t trust this’.

It was these 1997 words that underpinned the Badger’s answer about today’s ‘digital slop’, a phrase that’s emerged in recent years to describe the huge growing volume of dubious online content produced using AI tools. Digital technology has changed the world since 1997, AI continues to change it under our feet, and AI-enabled ‘digital slop’ does little for humanity except add to the mass digital exploitation of people. People have come to learn with social media over the years that dubious content, online misinformation, and addictive scrolling are not bugs but features of the system, and that they are becoming ever-more slaves to algorithms that don’t have their best interests at heart. Countering this requires an iron will and some disciplined personal behaviour. In relation to AI produced ‘digital slop’, perhaps ‘I don’t need this, I don’t want this, I don’t trust this, and I don’t consume this’ is a better mantra for today than the 1997 words. AI is a powerful technology that cannot be ignored, but the general public probably need more attitude and behavioural alignment with these words if humanity is to resist its mounting digital slavery…

Digital backlash…

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Backlash, Digital technology, Information Technology, Life, Online Services, social media, Technology

The Artemis mission around the dark side of the moon, the sight of humanoid robots running a half marathon (here and here), Anthropic’s Claude Mythos AI model and comments by ex-PM Rishi Sunak, all illustrate the power and relentless advance of digital technology. Having a decades-long career in the IT industry, it’s been routine for the Badger to deal with perpetual change in digital technology. The rapidity of that change kept the Badger and his colleagues motivated, challenged, learning and eager for new skills, and greatly satisfied when systems were delivered to clients and put into operational use. With this background you might think the Badger is an ardent digital technophile today, but he’s not. He’s ‘neutral’ with no strong affinity for, or aversion to, digital technology. He’s not overly enthusiastic about digital technology’s constant impact on our lives, but not overly critical of it either. Why is that?

The answer lies in three points: there’s no putting digital advances back in the box once they exist, not all digital technology is good for society, and digital technology dominated by a handful of individuals, corporations, or countries does not lead to a focus on benefiting humanity as a whole. Regarding the first point, innovation is a human attribute that will always produce advances, and there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s the second and third points which have moved the Badger to ‘neutral’ over the last decade, because digital technology has taken over our lives by stealth, driven ostensibly by agendas set by giant US and Chinese corporations controlled by a handful of individuals. Regulators have been slow, and tech giants have strongly resisted the introduction of sensible new laws that benefit wider society at every turn because of the threat to their own agendas. Digital advances have infiltrated society by default and diffusion without too much regard for the impact on the public. AI simply illustrates the point. Philosophical objectivity is thus at the heart of why the Badger’s become a neutral rather than ardent technophile.

Everyone today is more aware than ever before of digital technology’s downsides. There’s a growing willingness for the public to push back on the digital world. The UK government backtracked on Digital ID ambitions after a backlash, there’s a growing backlash against AI in the US (see here, here, and here), Swedish schools are cutting back on digital learning and returning to books, pen, and paper, numerous countries are  moving to ban social media for under 16s, a ban on children using smartphones at school has just been announced in the UK, and big tech has just lost a landmark social media addiction case. Society’s pushing back and questioning an unrestrained digital world more and more, and this backlash seems likely to grow with time. Indeed, with the world as it is today, the Badger’s unlikely to move from a neutral affinity any time soon…

Required leadership qualities – Competence, Consistency, Clarity, Communication and Charisma…

Posted on by The Information Badger in Delivery, Education, Information Technology, Leadership, Learning, Project Management, social media, Training

Early in the Badger’s IT career before the internet arrived, training for delivery people – project and team leaders, and technical staff – took place face to face in a group led by a senior delivery person and a professional trainer. Such training was often a one or two-day event conducted away from the hubbub of the workplace so that participants were not distracted by their normal work activities. At one course the Badger attended, participants were challenged to express the qualities that the members of project teams look for in their delivery leader. Participants, all team, or project leaders with various levels of experience, had ten minutes to produce five words for discussion with the course leaders and the wider group.

Many found it more difficult than expected because they struggled to think about delivery leadership from the perspective of team members who were not, and never aspired to be, leaders. Nevertheless, at the end of the exercise and subsequent discussion, the group converged on the following five words as required leadership qualities: Competence, Consistency, Clarity, Communication and Charisma. These words became known as the 5Cs and provided the theme underpinning the rest of the course. Whilst their context related to what delivery people look for from their delivery leader, the Badger’s found over the years that they are a good reference point for what to look for in leaders more generally.

The Badger’s worked for, and with, many senior leaders of all kinds over the years. They all had different personalities, strengths, and weaknesses. Some were more competent than others, some were more consistent and clearer than others, and some were better and more inspiring communicators than others. None were extroverts, but they all had a charisma that you couldn’t quite put your finger on. Underpinned by the 5Cs, the Badger considered some as much better leaders than others. There’s lots of broader and more detailed information available about the traits of good leaders, but the Badger’s routinely used the simple, qualitative, 5Cs as his mental ‘initial leadership quality’ checklist over the years to shape an initial opinion – which sometimes has subsequently changed. Sometimes, however, that initial opinion has not been very flattering and has not changed.

With the 5Cs concept in your psyche, you can’t help but use it to judge leaders who regularly appear on broadcast or social media even though you’ve never met them. Inevitably that’s unfair, but rather than relying on instinct alone, the 5Cs provides some structure in forming an opinion about where that person is on the POOR to GOOD leadership qualities spectrum. Ego, wealth, and having a powerful position is not the same as having good leadership qualities. For example, any leader who rants publicly and profanely on social media is unprofessional and sets a bad example for online behaviour. Someone with GOOD leadership qualities would never do this…

Will AI experience a ‘tobacco moment’?

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Information Technology, Legal matters, social media

The Badger smiled and then sighed when Meta and YouTube were recently found liable for harming a young woman through the addictive design of their products and their failure to warn users of the risks. The smile was because it’s good to see tech giants not getting their own way. The sigh was because it’s taken far too many years to get to this point. Sensible people have known for years that these apps are designed to keep users compulsively engaged for as long as possible because it’s the clever monetisation of this that underpins their business models.

The Badger recalls the early days of social media when it simply helped people stay in touch, share milestones, and reconnect with old friends. In those days there was a clear divide between real and online life. Conversations ended on leaving a room or putting the phone down, photographs lived in physical albums, and social media was used as a harmless tool and not something that shaped or dominated how we lived. Today things are quite different. Social media has grown in power, profitability, and influence, to such an extent that the average person spends more time online using it than is prudent. What’s changed since those early days is the design of the apps and platforms. Endless scrolling, algorithm-driven recommendations, push notifications, and short video loops aren’t accidental. They’re features engineered to keep people engaged for as long as possible. Indeed, the BBC was reporting way back in 2018 that social media apps were deliberately addictive to users. The Badger thinks all this has certainly eroded the real-world routines, relationships, and boundaries for users over the last decades.

In the Meta and YouTube case, the prosecution lawyers have cleverly focused on how platforms are designed rather than what’s posted on them to win. The two giants plan to appeal but it’s debatable whether the appeals will succeed. Social media is thus having to grapple with the fact that this could be a reckoning similar to that experienced by the tobacco industry some decades ago. This ‘tobacco moment’ prompted the Badger to muse on whether AI will ultimately experience such a moment too. He concluded that it will. AI has the potential to harm institutions, elections, markets, information ecosystems, and critical infrastructure, and so its reckoning moment could happen faster, globally, and structurally. The possible triggers might relate to bias, misinformation, autonomy, and safety failures. Like the ‘tobacco moment’ for social media, AI’s moment will not be about banning it, but about liability.

A ‘tobacco moment’ isn’t about a single lawsuit. It happens when society collectively decides that an industry has externalized too much harm and the legal, regulatory, and cultural tides all turn at once. It seems foolhardy, therefore, to think that AI will be immune to a ‘tobacco moment’ of its own at some stage in the future…

Rage against the screen…

Posted on by The Information Badger in Education, Engineering, Information Technology, Learning, Lego, Life, Online Safety, social media, Transport

The Badger’s 6-year-old grandson likes trains! Books about trains, Brio train sets, and Lego trains are favourite toys, but seeing and riding on real trains brings a special sparkle to his eyes. He loves to watch steam engines chuff along the Watercress Line, see historic locomotives in museums, ride miniature railways at visitor attractions, and travel on the regular trains that commuters use every day. He’s fascinated by how trains work, which is great, but his persistent questions about ‘how’ and ‘why’ can sometimes be wearing!

Last weekend the Badger and his grandson did something that didn’t relate to trains. We visited the Tangmere Military Aviation Museum, a small place with a number of static military jets as well as memorabilia from when Tangmere was a World War II RAF fighter base. The visit spawned an observation about 6-year-olds that he had not anticipated. At each exhibit there’s a computer that can be used to engage with the exhibit’s story, pull up photographs, and watch film clips. At many exhibits it’s possible to sit in the cockpit, peer into the fuselage, and use a computerized simulator. The Badger’s grandson observed that planes are engineered and work differently to trains!

It was all fun, but the Badger noticed that his grandson preferred using the computers rather than engaging physically with the exhibit itself. For example, the Canberra has part of the fuselage removed so visitors can easily lean in to see the environment around the pilot and crew. Adjacent to the jet is a computer showing images streamed from a camera mounted inside the fuselage. The camera can be panned through 360 degrees using a mouse and the user can zoom in on any part of the pilot and crew area. This 6-year-old used this computer rather than physically looking inside the fuselage. This preference was clear with other exhibits too. Seeing that ‘the screen’ had a greater pull with the youngster than exploring the exhibit physically made the Badger uneasy. If youngsters in their early formative years prefer screens to engaging with the physical real world, then we should surely all be worried.

On the car radio driving home, the Badger listened to the CEO of Mumsnet, being interviewed about Mumsnet’s ‘Rage against the Screen’ campaign which is calling on politicians to ban social media for under-16s, stop Big Tech using data to target children with addictive algorithms, and to put children’s safety and wellbeing ahead of platform profits. The Badger found himself agreeing with the points made. In the UK, you must be 16 years or older to do many things (see here), so why not ban social media for under 16s? If the Badger’s grandson is already ‘virtual rather than physical world first’ at the age of 6, then ‘Raging against the Screen’ is surely a campaign that needs to succeed…   

Untruth Social…

Posted on by The Information Badger in Conflict, Ethics & Regulation, Information Technology, Leadership, Opinion, social media

The Badger is not a journalist, a member of any political party, or a subscriber to any particular ideology. He’s just a member of the UK public whose blog normally avoids commenting on the pronouncements of the ‘global elites’ who recently gathered in Davos, Switzerland. Today is, however, an exception because President Trump’s recent utterances were an insulting word-salad where facts seemed irrelevant. Here are a few points from the Badger’s cogitation on the President’s various comments and positions.

The first point is that President Trump has been democratically elected and so we must assume that his policies and approach, whether domestic or foreign, have the support of the American people. The second is that he and this US administration are brutally ruffling feathers domestically in the US and internationally. The President has taken many positions to date that have validity, and many that don’t, but his bullying has changed how his country is viewed by the public beyond the USA’s shores forever.

The third point is that people in Europe feel that the USA is no longer a trusted ally. Trust takes years to build, seconds to break, and forever to repair. President Trump’s utterances have broken that trust. No one trusts a Russian because of President Putin, and now no one trusts an American because of President Trump! The fourth point is that this elderly President’s utterances fully highlight a character with a need for personal attention, praise, admiration and that they are always right on everything. A President who publishes emails from the leaders of longstanding allies and asserts that the UK army was not ‘a frontline fighter’ in Afghanistan is, frankly, untrustworthy, and undeserving of anyone’s respect.

So, here’s the final point. The old adage ‘don’t get angry, get even’ seems apt. National governments recognise their relationship with the US has changed and that adapting to a new future will be challenging. Governments may be angry but getting even is much more difficult for them. Ordinary members of their public, however, have more power to get even than they realise. The US stock market is heavily dependent on the performance of tech stocks. If ordinary members of the public in Europe collectively stopped using social media and streaming services for just one week then the big US tech giants’ revenues would be hit. If everyone stopped using social media for one week every month then the hit would soon mount to a crisis. Investors avidly track engagement metrics, and so stock prices could drop sharply because if users aren’t scrolling, money-making ads aren’t being served. The market impact could be problematic for President Trump.

In a world dominated by social media, streaming, and online services, it’s worth remembering that ordinary people have more power in their hands to register displeasure than most realise. Perhaps it’s time to change our behaviour and wield that power…

Social media: The same trajectory as tobacco?

Posted on by The Information Badger in Business, Information Technology, Public safety, social media, Technology

A New Year is fast approaching. For many it’s a time of joy and optimism, but for others it can be a daunting, sad, and worrying prospect. Christmas and the New Year period for the Badger’s family is about getting together whatever the circumstances. When we do, there’s always a discussion about the future of the tech world and so the Badger’s been musing on the subject in preparation. One of his conclusions has been that foreseeing a future event isn’t as outrageous as it might seem if you look at history and compare it with present-day dynamics.

The Badger’s concluded, for example, that ‘social media will follow the same trajectory as other industries that have touched health, cognition and social order’. That’s not an outrageous conclusion when there are striking structural parallels between social media and, for example, the tobacco industry. The latter thrived for decades in a regulatory vacuum with products that were known to damage users’ health. Similarly, social media operates in an under-regulated space with products that keep users engaged to maximise profits regardless of the toll on public health. Whereas tobacco’s harm is biochemical and physiological, social media’s is cognitive, social, behavioural, and physical in a way that’s harder to see or measure. It hides it’s harm behind its convenience, utility, and benefits. Worrying about harmful content, its encouragement of habitual screentime leading to lower physical activity, lowering attention spans, and eroding emotional adaptability, is not misplaced because these are all bad for long term physical and mental health.

The tobacco industry was built on the underlying motives of maximum user engagement, maximum revenue, product optimisation for addictive behaviour, and resistance to regulation. Social media seems the same. With tobacco, law makers eventually ‘woke up’ because – as history shows with industries that touch human health, cognition, and social order – once harms and their cost become undeniable in the public domain, society always pushes back! At some stage this seems likely to happen with social media resulting in its radical transformation. Gradual reform rarely works when business models are not aligned with societal well-being, companies are financially and politically powerful, and consumers have become accustomed to products and services. Any transformation of social media, given the slow speed of regulation, seems a long way off unless something radical happens.

What could that something be? Well, history shows that radical change tends to come from economic collapse rather than moral awakenings or gradual reform. If the social media giants were to start making huge financial losses that collapse their share price, then radical change would happen because such shocks always force restructuring, regulation, and cultural re-evaluation. Is this plausible? Well, never say never! The Badger will be adopting ‘never say never’ as his reference point for everything during 2026. In the current world and tech climate, it seems silly to do otherwise…

The world needs Australia to succeed with banning those under 16 from major social media platforms…

Posted on by The Information Badger in Business, Ethics & Regulation, Information Technology, Public safety, social media

Australia’s legislation banning the access of those under the age of sixteen from major social media platforms came into force today, 10th December. Its purpose is to protect children from harmful content, cyberbullying, and online predators. The major social media platforms are required to take reasonable steps to enforce age restrictions or face fines of up to AU$50 million. A neat item from Australia’s ABC on the topic can be found here.  Some platforms began locking out existing under-sixteen accounts and blocking new ones a couple of weeks ago.

Australia is the first country in the world to impose such a ban, and their move could be the first domino in a global trend given that debates are underway in many other countries about following suit. Supporters of the ban see it as a necessary safeguard against online harms and a way to hold the giant tech companies accountable. Critics and the social media companies, however, argue that the ban is blunt, hard to enforce, risks isolating teenagers, and raises privacy/digital rights concerns. After absorbing a wide variety of views expressed in the media by affected teens, parents, and industry and government commentators, the Badger asked himself, ‘who’s side are you on?’ He found the answer surprisingly easy.

From his own use of social media, the Badger thinks that society’s general moral decline is plain to see when misinformation and disinformation abound, and a lot of content amplifies unethical behaviour, distorts decent judgement, and attempts to reshape cultural values. Viral fame seems to reward scandals, outrage, and bad conduct, and constant exposure to divisive content fuels fear and outrage undermining the traditional values that have held communities together for generations. Today’s under-sixteens are vulnerable because they often model their behaviour on what they see online rather than on traditional role models. The Badger thus admires and supports Australia’s action because the major platforms have been too powerful for far too long. They are fast to act to make more money from users’ content, but slow to act on anything dubious or perceived as limiting their power and interests. Will more countries eventually follow Australia’s lead? Probably.

The ban’s critics assert that under-sixteens will simply find alternative ways to access the major platforms. That’s a hollow argument because it’s always been true that teenagers find ways around legal barriers. For example, there are laws about underage consumption of alcohol and smoking cigarettes, and yet it happens! Similarly, in his youth the Badger and his friends found ways of watching movies rated as inappropriate for our age at the local cinema. As has always been the case, the law puts a firm stake in the ground for society, and long may that continue. The world thus needs Australia to succeed with its ban, so let’s hope it does…

A musing about social media and ‘Black Friday’…

Posted on by The Information Badger in Education, Information Technology, Learning, Legal matters, Security, social media

It’s ‘Black Friday’ in the UK on Friday and High Street and online businesses are marketing their ‘epic deals’. This year the Badger’s received a plethora of email notifications from organisations warning to be wary of online shopping scams as ‘Black Friday’ approaches. One from a UK bank has the opening line ‘Did you know that 70% of online shopping scams start on social media?’  Yes, the Badger already knows this. It’s just one of many facts about social media that illustrates that diligent wariness is necessary when using these platforms.

Today the public feel uneasy about the world which is the most unsettling and unstable it’s been for decades. Global tensions abound. Politics is highly polarised. Economies are fragile. Conflict abounds. Shocks are more frequent. Power seems to rest with the handful of billionaires that dominate the digital world, and so on. Earlier this week, the Badger and a plumber friend chatted over a seasonal mince pie and coffee about factors that may have facilitated the instability the public observes. The internet is to blame, the Badger’s friend suggested. However, we dismissed that and decided instead that while social media can’t be blamed for all the world’s woes, it has certainly played a part.

We concluded this because social media platforms often say they are ‘free speech zones’ while simultaneously curating communication to protect their own business models. They are, after all, not democracies but huge, controlled, money-making ecosystems where the primary liability for what’s posted rests with the poster, not the platform. The persistent misinformation, disinformation, and offensive, inflammatory, and deceptive material that can often be encountered on them polarises opinions and facilitates scams from any part of the globe. The US President’s suing of the BBC, we decided, simply illustrates that there’s one rule for social media and another for everyone else. Why? Because the platforms often provide equally reprehensible edited videos that appear to go unpunished. Many will disagree, but we decided that social media has poisoned attitudes and thus contributed to fuelling an unsettled world.

The message here is not that social media is completely bad. It’s simply a reminder to understand their underlying business model and to think carefully about what you post or view. Think about whether your social media interactions are contributing to the very unsettled and disrupted world we are currently experiencing. Remember that these platforms are not the bastions of free speech that many would have you believe. Free speech, at least here in the UK, existed long before the advent of giant money-making social media platforms. Finally, take care when shopping online for ‘Black Friday’. Be wary of ‘limited time’ or ‘selling fast’ offers from organisations with social media profiles that don’t seem right. If something looks too good to be true, then it’s probably not what it seems…