Don't always give people what they want on the internet?

It is most of the time a great thing that IT companies can provide personalized search results and suggestions. But maybee it can also leads to people getting a more narrowed world view and a more uncompromising and extreme political beliefs. So should IT companies some of the time (but of course not most of the time) don't give people what they want on the internet?

For example a person watching action movies on Netflix get a suggestion for a romcom or a people far to right get a suggestion for a Micheal Moore book on Amazonas. Will it increase people world view and understanding of other perspectives or will it just make people angry and frustrated?

The question is of course about IT companies doing it voluntarily.

You're talking about business, why wouldn't a company, any company, give its customers what they want? You're making no sense.

Cephus said:

You're talking about business, why wouldn't a company, any company, give its customers what they want? You're making no sense.

Click to expand...

Yes that is one way of looking at it, that companies should only strive to maximize their profits and one way of doing it is use algorithms to always give the customer optimized and personalized suggestions and search results.

Another way of looking it is that companies have a duty to both make a profit and take social responsibility and/or living in a less divisive democracy with more informed citizen can also be good for the business owners.

The question is if IT companies can find a way to change a minority (that can be small) of their search results and suggestions so it gives the customers a wider and more complex experience and understanding of the world? That if customers take some time and look at the results and suggestion that are not completly adapted to their preconceived notions they maybee learn something new and discover new ideas.

Or will changing some of the search results and suggestion only lead to that customers getting annoyed and angry because they don't always get the search result that they instantly feel is correct for them and instead choose a competitor? That for example people have being so accustomed to only view and listen to things that don't challenge their preconceived notions

Bergslagstroll said:

Yes that is one way of looking at it, that companies should only strive to maximize their profits and one way of doing it is use algorithms to always give the customer optimized and personalized suggestions and search results.

Another way of looking it is that companies have a duty to both make a profit and take social responsibility and/or living in a less divisive democracy with more informed citizen can also be good for the business owners.

The question is if IT companies can find a way to change a minority (that can be small) of their search results and suggestions so it gives the customers a wider and more complex experience and understanding of the world? That if customers take some time and look at the results and suggestion that are not completly adapted to their preconceived notions they maybee learn something new and discover new ideas.

Or will changing some of the search results and suggestion only lead to that customers getting annoyed and angry because they don't always get the search result that they instantly feel is correct for them and instead choose a competitor? That for example people have being so accustomed to only view and listen to things that don't challenge their preconceived notions

Click to expand...

It is not the job of any company to force social responsibility on customers or to educate the customers. It is the job of companies to make money and reward their stockholders. Anyone who doesn't know this is an idiot.

Cephus said:

It is not the job of any company to force social responsibility on customers or to educate the customers. It is the job of companies to make money and reward their stockholders. Anyone who doesn't know this is an idiot.

Click to expand...

A more polarized society with voters having a narrow knowledge of the world can be bad both the economy and companies. For example it can lead to more budget crisis that hurt the economy and also lead to political gridlock that makes it harder to pass reforms that improve business climate and customer demand in society. Also more and more companies see the benefits of CSR and stockholders are also people living in and affected by society.

That in todays worlds people can not only choose to only consume far right or far left media but also get optimized and personalized suggestions and search results after their political lean. This risk leads to a "bubble society" their right wing people live in right wing bubbles and vice versa. Leading to less exchanges of ideas and understanding between diffrent political groups. But IT companies is amongst the most creative so they should be able to give people a wider choice without hurting their profits. Maybee just simple things like Google see to that a left leaning person not only get left leaning news sources but instead that one or two results on the first search result page are to moderate or even right wing new sources. Or that companies like Amazonas don't only have "this you may like" tips but instead also once in awhile have "try something new" tips.

Bergslagstroll said:

A more polarized society with voters having a narrow knowledge of the world can be bad both the economy and companies. For example it can lead to more budget crisis that hurt the economy and also lead to political gridlock that makes it harder to pass reforms that improve business climate and customer demand in society. Also more and more companies see the benefits of CSR and stockholders are also people living in and affected by society.

That in todays worlds people can not only choose to only consume far right or far left media but also get optimized and personalized suggestions and search results after their political lean. This risk leads to a "bubble society" their right wing people live in right wing bubbles and vice versa. Leading to less exchanges of ideas and understanding between diffrent political groups. But IT companies is amongst the most creative so they should be able to give people a wider choice without hurting their profits. Maybee just simple things like Google see to that a left leaning person not only get left leaning news sources but instead that one or two results on the first search result page are to moderate or even right wing new sources. Or that companies like Amazonas don't only have "this you may like" tips but instead also once in awhile have "try something new" tips.

Click to expand...

But that's still not the responsibility of any company.

Bergslagstroll said:

It is most of the time a great thing that IT companies can provide personalized search results and suggestions. But maybee it can also leads to people getting a more narrowed world view and a more uncompromising and extreme political beliefs. So should IT companies some of the time (but of course not most of the time) don't give people what they want on the internet?

For example a person watching action movies on Netflix get a suggestion for a romcom or a people far to right get a suggestion for a Micheal Moore book on Amazonas. Will it increase people world view and understanding of other perspectives or will it just make people angry and frustrated?

The question is of course about IT companies doing it voluntarily.

Click to expand...

Companies don't give people what they want. They do what will make them money.

Well... you're just recognizing the problems of democracy... but I don't think this is a method to curb it..

Cephus said:

But that's still not the responsibility of any company.

Click to expand...

The responsibility of any company is to follow the wishes of the owners. Today it exists many successful companies their the owners have set the goals for the companies to both make a profit and take social responsibility.

Also companies spend enormous amount of money on advertisement and PR to influence us both as citizens and customers. So of course should we have the right to try to influence companies and for example try to make them take more social responsibilities. Their are a lot of successful campaigns that have accomplished that.

99percenter said:

Companies don't give people what they want. They do what will make them money.

Click to expand...

Fair point. That maybe for example a left leaning person would feel roughly the same about getting suggestion to four high quality left leaning books and one high quality moderate or even right leaning book, as getting a suggestion to four high quality left leaning books and one average or even low quality left leaning book on Amazon. But Amazon will probably program the algorithms to create the later suggestion because they believe it will be a little more profitable.

celticwar17 said:

Well... you're just recognizing the problems of democracy... but I don't think this is a method to curb it..

Click to expand...

What is great with democracy is that we can have an open debate about democracy and how it can make it better. For example the technology advances that have happen during the last couple of decades have open up a lot of new opportunities for both getting, discussing and sharing information and political ideas. But as a wrote in my earlier post can also lead to a “bubble society”.

Yes their are also other ways for example set your browser to incognito mode or like some of my female friends that changed their gender on Facebook to male because the got sick of all the dieting ads.

But we live in a time they many people are busy and wants convenience. So maybe the creative IT companies can find ways to both give their customers personalized searched and suggestion but at the same time give their customers easy access to new ideas and opinions beyond their preconceived opinions.

Bergslagstroll said:

It is most of the time a great thing that IT companies can provide personalized search results and suggestions. But maybee it can also leads to people getting a more narrowed world view and a more uncompromising and extreme political beliefs. So should IT companies some of the time (but of course not most of the time) don't give people what they want on the internet?

For example a person watching action movies on Netflix get a suggestion for a romcom or a people far to right get a suggestion for a Micheal Moore book on Amazonas. Will it increase people world view and understanding of other perspectives or will it just make people angry and frustrated?

The question is of course about IT companies doing it voluntarily.

Click to expand...

Why would they want to withhold information?

joG said:

Why would they want to withhold information?

Click to expand...

For practical reason Amazon can not put all their thousands of books in their "this you may like" tip and Google can't show all the search results on their first search result page. So their optimize and personalized the results for their customers. That is of course mostly a good thing but as I wrote it can contribute to a bubble society their for example left leaning people only get left leaning suggestion and search results.

Bergslagstroll said:

The responsibility of any company is to follow the wishes of the owners. Today it exists many successful companies their the owners have set the goals for the companies to both make a profit and take social responsibility.

Also companies spend enormous amount of money on advertisement and PR to influence us both as citizens and customers. So of course should we have the right to try to influence companies and for example try to make them take more social responsibilities. Their are a lot of successful campaigns that have accomplished that.

Click to expand...

For most public companies, it is to make money for the stockholders, who are the real owners of the company. If some social program makes them more money, I can't see them complaining, but that's a secondary consideration to making money.

Bergslagstroll said:

For practical reason Amazon can not put all their thousands of books in their "this you may like" tip and Google can't show all the search results on their first search result page. So their optimize and personalized the results for their customers. That is of course mostly a good thing but as I wrote it can contribute to a bubble society their for example left leaning people only get left leaning suggestion and search results.

Click to expand...

I would not have thought that that should be called "withholding" information but selective presentation. The info is still there and freely available. What the selection does do is the same thing as old fashioned bookshops specialized on sifi, leftist stuff or esoterics and news media catering to business people, religious groups or Democrats that are as prone to positive feedback risks as the preselction at Amazon.com.

Bergslagstroll said:

Yes that is one way of looking at it, that companies should only strive to maximize their profits and one way of doing it is use algorithms to always give the customer optimized and personalized suggestions and search results.

Another way of looking it is that companies have a duty to both make a profit and take social responsibility and/or living in a less divisive democracy with more informed citizen can also be good for the business owners.

The question is if IT companies can find a way to change a minority (that can be small) of their search results and suggestions so it gives the customers a wider and more complex experience and understanding of the world? That if customers take some time and look at the results and suggestion that are not completly adapted to their preconceived notions they maybee learn something new and discover new ideas.

Or will changing some of the search results and suggestion only lead to that customers getting annoyed and angry because they don't always get the search result that they instantly feel is correct for them and instead choose a competitor? That for example people have being so accustomed to only view and listen to things that don't challenge their preconceived notions

Click to expand...

Where does it say companies have a duty to do anything other than make money without hurting people?

joG said:

I would not have thought that that should be called "withholding" information but selective presentation. The info is still there and freely available. What the selection does do is the same thing as old fashioned bookshops specialized on sifi, leftist stuff or esoterics and news media catering to business people, religious groups or Democrats that are as prone to positive feedback risks as the preselction at Amazon.com.

Click to expand...

True that society have been polarized before both USA and other countries and there have existed a lot of other things that could contribute to a more polarized society. But today we live in a much more polarized society and personalizing and optimazition is not only Amazon but a large part of our online life. For example ads on sociala medias and webpages, suggestion on shopping sites, suggestion on streaming sites to search result pages. That this taken to extreme can contribute to a more polarized society that can have many negative effect on both democracy, people and companies.

Bergslagstroll said:

True that society have been polarized before both USA and other countries and there have existed a lot of other things that could contribute to a more polarized society. But today we live in a much more polarized society and personalizing and optimazition is not only Amazon but a large part of our online life. For example ads on sociala medias and webpages, suggestion on shopping sites, suggestion on streaming sites to search result pages. That this taken to extreme can contribute to a more polarized society that can have many negative effect on both democracy, people and companies.

Click to expand...

It is certainly true that the polarization is on a cyclical rise the speed of which is probably considerably influenced by electronic media.