> the people most susceptible to lies and propaganda are willingly seeking it out. That’s always been a problem but social media has made it orders of magnitude easier to discover.
What are you basically saying is: democracy (which is impossible without free speech) is not able to work after social media is invented and deployed, because some people are susceptible to lies and propaganda. I kinda doubt the truth of such a radical statement. Democracy is not an ideal thing, but look what happens with alternatives - when some wise men decide what is better for those susceptible (and all others too).
No, what I’m saying is that democracy requires constant reinforcement - people have to stay committed to the ideas around sharing power, respecting other citizens they disagree with, and some basic shared reality.
That doesn’t mean we can’t have social media but it means that we need to have some basic constraints, and that companies need regulation, especially for what they promote.
Also, to be clear I’m not saying that this is unique to social media - for example, the current wave of anti-democratic sentiment in the U.S. has been promoted on cable TV as well - but that we can’t continue to ignore social media at a time when it’s shaping so much popular opinion.
What are you basically saying is: democracy (which is impossible without free speech) is not able to work after social media is invented and deployed, because some people are susceptible to lies and propaganda. I kinda doubt the truth of such a radical statement. Democracy is not an ideal thing, but look what happens with alternatives - when some wise men decide what is better for those susceptible (and all others too).