臉書被成功沖昏頭了嗎？

近年來，擁有最大社會影響力及社群號召力的臉書，接連傳出個資侵犯的醜聞，但早在問題爆發前，Mark Zuckerberg的導師及臉書的投資者Roger McNamee就察覺到跡象了。在試圖提點祖克伯無果後，又得知管理階層是刻意任由事態發展，讓McNamee從臉書袒護者轉為指控者，並揭露了兩大企業又是如何操縱輿論，甚至間接影響2016美國大選及英國脫歐。

動搖矽谷的問題根本在於演算法及商業營運模式

"There is something about the algorithm and business model that enable bad actors to harm innocent people using Facebook." said Roger McNamee. He saw Facebook's problems long before many others and had concerns about the danger that the social network posed to democracy.

「整個演算法和營運模式出了嚴重的紕漏，讓有心人士得以利用臉書傷害無辜的用戶。」Roger McNamee說道，他早在大眾產生疑慮前，便預測到社群網路會對民主體制造成威脅。

"It's a problem bigger than Facebook. This is a problem with the entire internet platform industry, and Mark is just one of the two most successful practitioners of it." he also said. The problem with Google and Facebook is that their goal is to replace humans in many daily activities. If you think about what they're doing with artificial intelligence, there are three markets that have proven to be incredibly lucrative: getting rid of white-collar work, telling people what to think using filter bubbles, and creating engines that tell people what to enjoy or consume.

「這不只是臉書的問題，這是危及到整個網路平台產業的危機，馬克只是其中一個擴大問題的代理人。」McNamee說。谷歌和臉書的問題在於意圖侵占人們日常活動，這些企業用人工智能，投入3個已被證實營利極高的市場，分別是擺脫白領工作、加厚同溫層的思想傳佈，並利用推薦引擎，操縱大眾該喜歡、該消費什麼。

背後牽動英國脫歐與2016美國大選的是「大腦駭客」

In his interview with the Guardian, McNamee also highlighted the term "brain hacking", which was invented by Tristan Harris, a design ethicist from Google. Brain hacking is used to describe what internet platforms do using the persuasive technologies to change users' habits. Those habits evolve into addictions that eventually make users vulnerable to manipulation. "Like a stroke of lightning, it made me see what it was that had potentially influenced the election in the US, and had potentially influenced Brexit." McNamee said.

《衛報》訪談中，Roger McNamee點出了由設計倫理倡權者Tristan Harris所提出的「大腦駭客」這個概念，大腦駭客被用來描述網路平台利用高科技，操縱用戶的使用習慣。這種習慣將會惡化為網路成癮，最後讓用戶非常容易受到誘導操縱。「那一刻我豁然了悟，這使我看透了這個模式不但能間接影響美國總統大選，也在無形中影響英國脫歐公投的結果。」McNamee說。

It never occurred to McNamee that there would be an asymmetry in the way that advertising works. After the 2016 presidential election in the US, there was evidence that the messages of the Trump campaign had 17 times greater effective reach than Clinton's messages per dollar spent. That's just a staggering advantage! Moreover, he realized that the surprising outcome of Brexit had conferred an extraordinary advantage through Facebook to one side: the Leave campaign.

McNamee從來沒想過廣告能造成這麼嚴重的分歧。在2016美國總統大選後，數據顯示川普的競選訊息的*有效到達率，多了希拉蕊陣營整整17倍的驚人優勢。此外，同年McNamee也驚覺，影響英國公投決定脫歐的要素，便是臉書賦予脫歐派強而有利的聲勢。

*有效到達率：在某一特定時間內，目標聽眾至少有一次廣告訊息暴露於其眼前的百分比，有效到達率(Effective Reach)若到達率越高，表示媒體曝光效果越好。

政府規範只解決一半的問題

Governmental regulation is only a partial solution. The point is that we have power to affect political change but it has to be collectively. If we use these platforms less and pay less attention to them, we can make a big impact. Government knows there's a problem, and they need to know that voters care enough to justify going in and regulating these companies. McNamee thinks that we are going to have to change how data is owned and used, and enforce antitrust laws to create space for new models to come along. This is a problem that can be solved through new businesses.

政府立法只能解決問題的一半，解決的核心在於大家要意識到我們共享著龐大的權力，而我們該將這份權力團結起來。如果我們抽掉對社群的注意力，就能對相關產業造成巨大的衝擊。政府知道體制脫軌了，但他們更要知道的是選民非常關注這個議題，甚至願意付諸行動，要求立法機關加以約束這些企業。同時，McNamee認為大眾將必須改變對個資所有權及使用權的看法，並推動反社群壟斷法，創造出全新的商業營運模式，來解決目前的危機。

參考資料：The Guadian、Fortune、Times、Intelligencer

---

 編輯/英語島編輯室

本文收錄於英語島English Island 2019年5月號
訂閱雜誌

加入Line好友