Abstract
AbstractIn this chapter, we turn our attention to the effects of the attention economy on our ability to act autonomously as a group. We begin by clarifying which sorts of groups we are concerned with, which are structured groups (groups sufficiently organized that it makes sense to attribute agency to the group itself). Drawing on recent work by Purves and Davis (Public Aff Q 36:136–62, 2022), we describe the essential roles of trust (i.e., depending on groups to fulfill their commitments) and trustworthiness (i.e., the property of a group that makes trusting them fitting) in autonomous group action, with particular emphasis on democratic institutions (which we view as group agents) and democratic legitimacy (which depends on trust and trustworthiness). We then explain how engagement maximization promotes polarization, which is detrimental to trust and trustworthiness and, in turn, democratic legitimacy and democratic institutions. We close by considering what groups might do to protect themselves from the threat posed to them by the attention economy.
Funder
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Florida International University
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Reference128 articles.
1. Akinwotu, Emmanuel. 2021. Facebook’s role in Myanmar and Ethiopia under new scrutiny. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/07/facebooks-role-in-myanmar-and-ethiopia-under-new-scrutiny. Accessed 17 July 2023.
2. Albertzart, Maike. 2019. A Kantian solution to the problem of imperceptible differences. European Journal of Philosophy 27, Nr. 4 (December): 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejop.12456
3. Alfano, Mark, Amir Ebrahimi Fard, J. Adam Carter, Peter Clutton, and Colin Klein. 2021. Technologically scaffolded atypical cognition: The case of YouTube’s recommender system. Synthese 199: 835–858.
4. Allcott, Hunt, Luca Braghieri, Sarah Eichmeyer, and Matthew Gentzkow. 2020. The welfare effects of social media. American Economic Review 110: 629–676.
5. Altman, Andrew, and Christopher Heath Wellman. 2004. A defense of international criminal law. Ethics 115: 35–67.