With whom and how to fight in the age of electronic media, and whether this fight is the severed tail of civil liberties.
Shortly thereafter (we do not hold any link between the incident) the world has faced another wave of virus attack, see the hashtag #WannaCry.
These events have once again fueled the old discussion about social networks, their development and impact on society.
Such disputes always take place on very different levels, from academic to domestic and political. Often opposing sides are not able to hear each other, going into maximalism full acceptance or absolute denial.
The child who wants the whole day to play on the tablet, is not ready to accept the position of the mother, seeking to limit it.
The game can be educational and extremely helpful, and the mother may be guided by considerations of health and harmonious development, but points of intersection with the sides will be small. Turning in a classic clash of “Fathers and children”, the conflict is gaining maximum explosive energy.
Further movement of the household in the socio-political area leads to the formulation of new theories. At the forefront is the mythical evil will, is able to cause harm to humanity or particular state, using the new tools of spiritual impoverishment.
To argue with such arguments — occupation tiresome and devoid of prospects. We can only point out that in the last few years the debate has moved into the digital field. Bees of our anthill strongly oppose honey.
And what will happen next?
In the framework of the global studies research group Pew Research Center in conjunction with Elon University of North Carolina interviewed more than a thousand professionals in the field of technology, media, government and corporate management on potential threats to social networks. The question was phrased:
Is social network a victim of the negative effects of aggression, ethnic strife, religious and sexual prejudices?
More than 42% of respondents said they do not expect significant changes compared to the current situation. 39% are inclined to believe that the impact of negative factors will increase. Only a small number of respondents believe in the positive social development trends in the communications network.
People are people, their opinions, habits, aspirations only reflected in the Internet, the overall temperature in the hospital has remained virtually unchanged, the other thing is that history is now available to everyone and in any form, and he, at a certain stage of concentration, is already capable of forming new ideas, prompting new action.
Interestingly, positive forward only in the context of patronage communication, in other words, widespread censorship. Dream about big Brother not devoid of charm.
The image of the Older Brother of the popular in mass culture, but, in fact, each gives it different properties.
Anonymity, which was one of the pillars of communication in the network in the initial stages of its formation, is no longer seen as a positive aspect — this is a global trend.
Negative factors the next decade of development of networking
This aggressive behavior in the network, an irrational strategy aimed at provoking the emotional reactions of the interlocutor. What are the psychological motives of trolling — the subject of a separate study. The fact is that this way of behavior is becoming more common: he “offline” is inherent in human nature, but in the context of anonymous network communication, the temptation becomes almost irresistible. Self-regulation in this situation is not valid, because trolling is impressed not only participants in the conversation, it stimulates the interest of a passive audience, albeit only at the initial stage.
The manipulation of the electoral process
This topic is not even hot, it overheated. We are talking about the use of botnets (networks of fake accounts in social networks operating in someone’s interests) and direct crime associated with the hacking of corporate and government networks, email services to discredit, and so on.
According to traditional media, such tactics can literally create presidents. This is largely an exaggeration, we are talking not about the direct use of social media, but about the game outside the legal field.