How Might We Improve Social Media?

Public discourse on social media platforms has gotten worse, but reducing incentives for bad behavior may help.

Photo by Jeremy Bezanger on Unsplash

Social media has taken a larger role in public life, from how we communicate with one another to how we get our news. But particularly in the past few years, it has brought out the worst in many people.

I talked to a friend a few months ago about what the world is like now that lots of people have smartphones and social media.

I told him that there are those who talk back to their television sets when they are watching programs. I'm guilty of this -- when I watch a Denver Broncos game, you'll hear plenty of instances of me not just cheering for touchdowns but making remarks when a play goes wrong (it's usually "come on, Denver!").

The thing about talking back to the TV, though, is the only people who know you're doing it are those in the room. Get a person on TV who makes what you think is a silly remark and they don't hear you when you say so.

Now that we have smartphones and social media, we have a means of actually telling somebody what we think is a silly remark -- and, this time, that somebody knows what we have to say.

But I remember that social media wasn't always that way. Jonathan Haidt recently appeared on Bari Weiss' Honestly podcast to discuss what's happened with social media and why it's eroding our discourse.

One of Haidt's points is that Facebook and Twitter, when first launched, didn't have features in which you could like or share something. You could respond to something, but that was it -- and what you usually responded to was pictures of family, friends and pets.

Then Facebook and Twitter added those features and implemented algorithms, which created a feedback loop that gave you more of what you preferred. This made it possible for posts to go viral -- and that wasn't always a good thing.

I would add to what Haidt discussed that Facebook used to have your "newsfeed" with everything in chronological order. It put the most recent posts from your friends first.

That changed when Facebook implemented its algorithm that showed you more of who you had more interactions. This led to the same issue the like and share features created: Users get more of the same, over and over, which reinforces their beliefs.

Combine that with those who respond to things on social media in the same way that people might talk back to the TV, and we have discourse that goes off the rails.

Haidt also mentioned that kids don't go out to play with each other at the park as much as before. Instead, they go straight home and get a tablet that keeps them occupied.

Haidt said that, when kids go out to the park and play with each other, they learn how to interact with other people and what it means to resolve conflict. Not so when they spend too much time on a tablet or smartphone -- the way social media works, it serves to create more conflict and kids don't learn how to resolve it.

What Haidt believes is needed is a social media model that doesn't incentivize bad behavior, as the current model does. He said one feature Twitter tested, that he liked, was a "down vote" button for which users couldn't see how many people chose it.

I believe Haidt is on the right track about how to address the issue of social media discourse. My suggestions I have mostly focus on Twitter, which I regularly use, but some could be implemented on Facebook. I'm not familiar with how other social media apps work, but they might be useful for them, too.

Here are a few things I would implement.

First, all timelines or equivalent thereof should have chronological order as the default option. On Twitter, you have the option to switch to that, but the default shows posts out of order, mixed with posts of what's trending and who your followers follow.

I would allow people to set their timelines as they wish, but chronological order needs to be the “factory installed” set-up. I believe it would do a lot to cut down on the feedback loop issues.

The next thing is that, while likes and shares are still allowed, only the person who made the post can see the statistics for them.

The way Facebook and Twitter work, everyone can see how many people reacted to a post. That may lead to people comparing themselves to one another and become tempted to post something just to get more likes and shares than others.

I don't think we can eliminate the like and share features, but limiting how much people can see stats for posts that aren't their own could help.

While I would still allow those who put up a post to know how many people liked or shared it, we may want to limit that feature to some degree. Perhaps that limitation is removing notifications unless somebody replies to a post. Users would then have to click on their posts to determine how many liked or shared something.

I also believe we need a feature that lets people know if somebody took a screenshot of a post they made, then put into a post themselves without tagging the person.

For the record, I don't want screenshots eliminated because that puts limitations on discourse. However, if a person is going to screenshot a user, that user needs the opportunity to respond. That's how discourse should work.

Finally, I would end the practice of social media platforms showing whatever happens to be trending. This will reduce the temptation for people to join in on whatever is going viral.

People could still have the option of following particular topics on social media, creating lists and becoming members of groups. But the key here is to let users decide what they want to follow, rather than a platform suggesting whatever gets the most interaction.

And one bit of advice I have is that it's a good idea to log out of your social media accounts on a regular basis. It's tempting to want to respond every time someone pings you on Facebook, but it can become a distraction, even an addiction, if you aren't careful.

But as far as social media companies go, they need to consider ways to not incentivize bad behavior -- and that isn't going to happen simply through kicking off more users. Revisions to how their platforms operate won't solve everything, but if they do reduce bad discourse, social media will be a better experience.