Discussions of social media, algorithmic feeds, and platforms tend to begin with a familiar assumption: platforms shape what people believe. The concern is often framed as persuasion, misinformation, or ideological capture.
From a relational perspective, this is backwards.
Platforms do not primarily persuade. They determine what can persist, what can survive, and what can continue to be intelligible across repeated interactions. They do not ask people to think differently; they structure what it is possible to think with ease.
Belief Is Downstream
Platforms provide flows of content saturated with affect, rhythm, and repetition. These flows select for viability:
-
ideas, styles, and forms that can survive multiple exposures
-
emotional and aesthetic patterns that are easily recognisable and repeatable
-
distinctions that feel intelligible within a given context
Belief, in contrast, is often a post hoc rationalisation. By the time someone articulates an opinion or aligns ideologically, the alignment has already been trained aesthetically and affectively.
Survival, Not Truth
The algorithms that drive visibility do not measure correctness, insight, or value. They measure uptake:
-
clicks
-
shares
-
dwell time
-
emotional engagement
These are coordination signals, not epistemic ones. What survives is not necessarily true, just readily intelligible and repeatable.
The Quiet Power of Selection
The relational effect is subtle but profound:
-
repetition stabilises form
-
recognisability normalises pattern
-
novelty is either absorbed or discarded based on how easily it fits the field
This is why the same content can appear globally at enormous scale while remaining superficially divisive yet structurally uniform. The field is being coordinated silently, continuously, and without consent.
Why Frames Outperform Messages
Traditional interventions — fact-checking, argumentation, counter-messaging — often fail because they address content rather than viability. A persuasive message can be heard, but if it cannot survive the flow, it disappears.
Platforms privilege:
-
the familiar
-
the emotionally digestible
-
the rhythmically coherent
…over the analytically or morally persuasive.
The Relational Consequence
We are no longer operating in cultural fields shaped primarily by human curation. We are participating in platformed intelligibility:
-
alignment precedes belief
-
affect shapes judgement before reason
-
attention is a scarce field being constantly pruned
Understanding this is the first step toward acting responsibly within these systems.
Closing
Platforms do not coerce; they train the possible. They do not change minds by argument; they change the conditions under which minds can move easily.
The ethical question is no longer what people think, but:
what patterns are we making easier to repeat simply by participating?
In the next post, we examine how taste, style, and affect are being automated, turning aesthetic coordination into a continuous, global process.
No comments:
Post a Comment