culture – Culture Critically

A Big Fat Fight Over Consumer Data Privacy: Apple’s IOS Updates Uncover Facebooks Appetite For User Data

by Hillary Hardig

Users of Facebook have long dealt with ongoing changes to the application’s privacy policy. And these changes aren’t necessarily wrong. It’s now been seventeen years since the launch of the platform by creator, Mark Zuckerberg, and seventeen years since Facebook led an explosion within the realm of social media. However, Facebook’s privacy policy is often scrutinized for its language and structure of the terms, making it difficult for users to clearly choose what data they are or are not willing to share with the company. The company’s data collection policies have not gone unnoticed and users are becoming increasingly aware of internet privacy. In turn, large corporations like Apple are making strides to ensure customers that their privacy is being prioritized. This has led Facebook and Apple, two of tech’s top companies, into a war over privacy.

In 2018, Facebook rewrote its Terms of Service (TOS) and Data Use Policy (DUP) to use more plain language to clearly illustrate to users how their data is collected and used. This was likely due to theories that Facebook collects data from user microphones and SMS messaging. In 2021 TOS and DUP changed again, this time revamping the layout of data settings on the platform and decentralizing the settings into multiple different places. In a statement explaining the renovation of settings, Facebook commented, “Settings are now grouped into six broad categories, each containing several related settings: Account, Preferences, Audience and Visibility, Permissions, Your Information, and Community Standards and Legal Policies … We’ve unbundled the Privacy Settings category and moved the settings previously contained within it into other categories.” Now, if users want to change a privacy setting, they must navigate multiple pages and scan through each page individually looking for specific toggles to turn off and on. Regarding this change, Facebook stated in the same statement that “we’re confident this new settings page will make it easier for people to visit their settings, find what they came for, and make the changes they want.” But to users, controlling their privacy settings just got a lot more difficult.

In a 2018 article published in the journal of Social Media + Society, authors Jennifer Jiyoung Suh and Eszter Hargittai asked participants to answer questions about their Facebook use and attitudes towards privacy. Interestingly, the study found that there is a considerable discrepancy between participants’ intended online privacy management and its actual effectiveness. The study stated that “despite participants’ perceived high level of knowledge and skills of online privacy management on Facebook, the majority of the posts collected for this study were shared with more people than the participants had intended” (p. 9). Since then, Facebook has been fighting a battle with Apple who, with the release of newer iOS versions, requires that app developers explicitly ask for permission to track users’ behavior across Apple’s App Store and the internet. But gaps in Apple’s push to increase privacy don’t fully limit Facebook’s ability to collect location information from your iPhone without your awareness.

In 2021, researchers Anatoliy Gruzd, Joanne McNeisha, Lilach Dahoah Halevib, and Martin Phillipsa studied the change in user privacy concerns and behavior on Facebook after exposure to a privacy literacy intervention called Data Selfie. The study found that after viewing their privacy information from Data Selfie, participants became increasingly more concerned about their online privacy. However, privacy intervention tools like these are likely underutilized. Platforms like Facebook require contracts of adhesion to be signed as written when a user creates a profile. This research suggests that because the contract must be signed as stated, users may be less likely to read and understand these contracts when knowing they cannot implement changes. Additionally, there are no regulations that protect users against the actions of Facebook and address users’ perceptions to motivate privacy-protective behavior.

In September of 2021, Facebook announced new capabilities for business owners following the danger to its ad targeting by Apple’s IOS 14 privacy initiative. Facebook testified that Apple’s changes would have a negative impact on the small businesses that rely on Facebook ad targeting to find and attain customers. In an interview with The New York Times, Apple’s CEO Tim Cook came back at Facebook’s comment saying, “I think that you can do digital advertising and make money from digital advertising without tracking people when they don’t know they’re being tracked.” However, Apple didn’t budge on any of its IOS privacy updates. Instead, Facebook was forced to implement a new way of connecting businesses to their target audience.

Among some of the changes, Facebook has made is a way for customers to explore businesses from their News Feed posts. When a user clicks on a topic like beauty, fitness, or home decor, users will be redirected to explore businesses related to their interests. This new system has two main advantages. The first is that users may stumble across a new business that relates to their interests. The second is that this feature allows Facebook to create its data set of users who like certain types of content. Eventually, businesses may be able to pay for higher placement on the News Feed, working a similar system to Google’s search bar advertising. Along with this roll out in 2021 were multiple other new business advertising tools like organic lead generation tools on Instagram, and quote requests via Messenger.

Changes to Facebook’s TOS and DUP are likely to continue. Efforts made by companies like Apple aren’t keeping Facebook from collecting data. The company continues to try and find ways to extract data from users, regardless of the effect on individual users or businesses. Luckily, battles between companies like Facebook and Apple are likely causing users to become more mindful of their personal data and different perspectives between companies bring the conversation of data collection to the consciousness of the public.

Algorithmic Curation of Culture on Netflix

by: Anna Transou

Within the recent decades, humankind has experienced a massive shift from how we expect media content to be presented to us. Alongside the introduction of artificial intelligence and supercomputers, the modern human seems to be quite comfortable with its current relationship with the algorithms that act as our own personal shopping or movie recommendation assistants. But how much do we really know about exactly how we’re being prescribed content, and why haven’t we all taken a step back to even think about the further implications of a computer generated culture such as the one we’re headed to, if not already in now? To answer some of these questions I have homed in on Netflix, the film and television platform with a whopping 213.6 million subscribers, to dive into the implications of humanity complacently entering into an agreement with computerized technologies in the supposed “co-creation” of culture.

Despite Netflix users interacting with and benefitting from the personalized suggestions that the Netflix Recommendation System (NRS) offers to us, what do we really know about how it works? Regarded as “trade secrets”, the complex algorithms are technically incomprehensible by the average consumer, but we do know some things about how they are designed and intended to function. In a 2014 article containing an interview with Todd Yellin, VP of Netflix product innovation, The Atlantic discovered more about how the media platform has accrued a “stockpile of data about Hollywood entertainment that is absolutely unprecedented.” In a process to reverse-engineer Hollywood, Netflix used large teams of people to deconstruct a myriad of elements within a vast collection of film and television to create microtags which would then help sort content into roughly 76,897 microgenres. Yellin boasted to The Atlantic about the efficacy of the algorithm’s personalization which aims at “putting the right title in front of the right person at the right time,” illustrating the formula’s analogous nature to that of Facebook’s highly customized NewsFeed. In conjunction with the accumulation and implementation of user data in creating personalized suggestions, the creation of NRS involved a process of probing the content individually, inspiring an investigation for the implications for algorithmically curated content.

The overarching concerns lie in the vexing unknown of what it means to involve computerized algorithms in the creation, definition, and curation of culture, a domain that has historically been reserved for humans. Netflix and many other algorithmically controlled platforms are primarily withholding a majority of the power in the distribution of cultural content, despite what their parent companies advertise to users. In the specific case of Netflix (but also applicable to many other media platforms), “reality gets coded into data for the machines, and then decoded back into descriptions for humans.” Such concerns over who has the power and authority to shape culture and ideas dates back at least to Marx and Engels’ discussion of the ruling class’ control of media and mental production. Whereas the curation of culture was once solely determined by the upper classes of whom held the means to produce media, today we are placing the significant task of cultural prescription into the inanimate hands of artificial intelligence. The construction and suggestion of cultural tastes by algorithms repositions human autonomy as, potentially, a secondary force, in which Netflix users provide the system with ample consumer data to facilitate the operation of recommendations in a one-way distribution of media content. The imbalance of power between human and machine occurs in the restraints placed upon users in that there is no true recourse for the consumer to edit their viewing history, interact socially with others on the platform, as well as the limited binary rating system which merely asks for a user to give content a thumbs up or down. Communication scholar, Fatima Gaw illustrates this dynamic further in pointing to the “restrictions [that] exist in the same paradigm where users are supposedly empowered by free choice and self-determination of their cultural experiences.” After all, Netflix promotes that “our members control what they watch” despite the constraints implemented within the platform to limit user agency in constructing their own individualized taste preferences apart from the algorithm’s prescriptions. The rigidity of the NRS “restrict[s] and often supersede[s] user agency” as it operates neither in an emancipatory or deterministic manner, but instead “inhibits users from deviating from the formula it prescribes.”

With proprietary goals in mind, Netflix’s recommendation system was not built to encourage diversity of media within the platform, instead, the algorithm operates to feed content to users similar to what they have already been favorable towards. The system’s primary functions bring up concerns of the development of cultural echo-chambers, such as has been discovered on social media apps like Facebook and Instagram. Further research must be done in order to discern what effect media echo-chambers will have on the development of culture and society, and how humans can fight back against an algorithmically produced mono-culture of the future that lacks cultural diversity.

Astrology Rising: Why young people are drawn to the stars

by Marie Quaranta

The decline in religion is far more than a statistic. Even though the prevalence of people practicing religion around the world has taken a hit it is not by coincidence or accident. While the motivations for people to leave an organized religion are varied, here is my own. I grew up in a Catholic household. Some might associate this with very strict and conservative parents, however that was far from how I was raised. My mother was something of a hippie who was forced into Catholic school by her Hungarian immigrant parents. Even though she rebelled against religion at a young age she always seemed to come back to it and wanted the same for her children. My mother’s slogan was always, “I’d rather my children rebel against the church than me!” As such, my siblings and I were caravanned to church every Sunday and bible study each Wednesday. I hated it but at least my best friend was also forced to be there.

Everything changed when my parents got divorced. Suddenly my mother also dreaded going to mass each Sunday. We no longer stayed after mass to chat with people and make the rounds. As a child this was amazing: it meant we got to go home and watch cartoons together. However, as I got older my mother opened up about how the entire church shunned her when news of her divorce spread. You would think she had killed her husband the way people looked at her. Other married women shuffled away from her as if her divorce would wear off on them.

I soon began to resent these people who treated my mother so poorly. How could someone preach love and acceptance and then turn their back on one another? I no longer found the teachings to be meaningful, but rather hypocritical. Everything that was preached seemed so out of touch with the way people acted. We must, so this logic went, love thy neighbor but at the same time refuse to accept divorced persons and any member of the LGBTQ+ as a part of our community. Right after my confirmation, an official sacrament accepting responsibility for your faith and destiny, I stopped attending mass, as did the rest of my family.

My family began new traditions instead. It was mandatory that everyone was home on Sunday afternoon and evening to spend time with family. My mother never had to enforce this rule, it was just something we were all happy to do. We had deep conversations at dinner about politics, what we believed in, and our aspirations in life. My family replaced a church service with communing together over food and positivity.

Soon my sister and I became interested in astrology. We loved figuring out what our charts meant and how it could be reflected in our day to day lives. We got the rest of our family involved, and surprisingly they all loved it. It seemed like the cosmic powers somehow really did understand all of us. For my family, astrology became, in a sense, countercultural. It didn’t take the place of religion or subvert it in the way some countercultures do, but it opened up an alternate space, a way of thinking about the world that didn’t reproduce the hypocrisies of organized churchgoing. It seemed like many other people began to see the merits of astrology. I wondered if this had something to do with the growing distrust and distaste for organized religion. For me, astrology did not provide a substitute for religion but rather another way of thinking about the world without the hypocrisy of the institutional church. For the rest of this paper I will try to process why so many people, especially youth like myself, have turned away from institutional forms of religion and turned to their own definition of spirituality and astrology.

Church attendance has been steadily declining in the United States. The trend began long before I, a member of Gen Z, made the switch. Each generation in the U.S. has steadily become less religiously affiliated starting with the Silent Generation. The primary shift away from religion could be attributed to Baby Boomers and some early Gen X growing up in the 70s alongside the final wave of hippie culture. The U.S. was ripe with protest and challenging traditional beliefs at this time. Women, African Americans, Native Americans, the LGBTQ+, and so many more marginalized groups were fighting for equality and acceptance. Anti War sentiments were strong and there began to be a call to action to save the environment. Organized religion did not make many progressive changes at the time. In fact, societal progression often made organized religion take deeper roots in their conservative traditional mindset. There are a lot of parallels between the protest and activism of the 1970s and the 2010s. The years were ripe with political unrest, social movements, distrust in government, and calls for environmental progress. This set the stage for a similar rebellion against organized religion, as institutions of all sorts were not seen as trustworthy, and indeed as interfering with the lives of people.

So why astrology? What would make young people turn to the stars? I can dissect this choice into a few reasons, somewhat based on my own personal experience. To begin, the rise in popularity of astrology was never meant to replace organized religion. The two are not mutually exclusive. However, younger generations may be drawn to astrology over a structured church atmosphere because it is open and accepting. There is no set rule of how to act, look, or practice astrology. You would not be considered a ‘bad’ follower of astrology if you only like to look at your horoscope once a month or whenever it comes up in conversation. People are free to be themselves and let the spirituality of astrology turn into whatever they need. As Malaysia and Eliza noted in their posts, one of the greatest strengths of organized religion is the community it provides. That community is great for those who have not been exiled or disenfranchised from it, like with my own mother. I have not felt welcomed in my church since the day I realized the hidden cruelness of those within the community. This experience is not just mine; it is very common for people who do not fit into the traditional boxes presented by rigid religions.

To replace the community traditional organized religion provided, young people turned to one of the things they know best: technology. Social media has begun a place to form groups of many kinds, and it has given a place for astrology lovers to unite. These short snippets of astrology can easily fit into everyday life without much strain or feeling like a chore. Instead, they have been made to be fun and engaging by youths for youths. Organized religion which seems so often arbitrarily based on the words of an ancient dead man makes turning to the stars no longer seem so far fetched.

Many Instagram pages are dedicated to making aesthetically pleasing astrology posts. Some accounts take a more factual approach with daily readings and explanations of what mercury being in retrograde actually means. The Instagram platform has become a place for astrology experts to share their knowledge and reach millions of people. There are a plethora of smaller accounts posting this content but some of the largest are @horoscopes.astrology (358 K followers), @themoontarot (952K followers), and @costarastrology (1.9 M followers). CoStar’s bio perfectly describes what accounts like this offer: a “hyper-personalized, social astrology experience.” Each facet of your chart is explored and explained on a regular basis to provide guidance, clarity, and goals. Accounts like these are for more of the dedicated practitioners of astrology who want to understand how stars and planets interplay with everyday life.

On a less serious note, Gen Z’s love for memes has also taken a hold over astrology. Accounts like @thezodiacstea (1.2 M followers), @sanctuarywrld (1.3 M followers), and @glossyzodiac (4.9 M followers) are the leaders of this astrology subculture. By far the most popular @glossyzodiac, has combined popular culture, memes, and astrology to create an engaging comedic account that has inspired many others. The posts on @glossyzodiac include some of Gen Z’s fashion icons, music idols, and favorite childhood TV shows. The account has been able to respond quickly to trends because they are members of the generations making them. It is appealing to newcomers of astrology because zodiac signs are explained in comedic lighthearted terms rather than strict rules.

@Sanctuarywrld which seems to combine both memes and relatable content with highly meaningful posts. The post shown to the left demonstrates a comedic way to live your life in response to astrological events. They focus heavily on the astrological community, as seen by its location front and center on their highlight reels. Even if their account is lighthearted and whimsical, they have gone out of their way to support social movements like Black Lives Matter and LGBTQ+ rights.

Astrology can be easy, fast, and fun or it can be deep, meaningful, and spiritual. At the end of the day, the common thread is that astrology is whatever someone makes of it. A community is formed around the common interest in astrology that is accepting and open rather than judgemental and closed minded. Following the stars or looking at your horoscope does not have to be a chore or a negative aspect of life because there is no enforcement or leader higher than the rest. Everyone can be equals exploring what the world means and how it works together. The decline in church attendance and the rise of astrology in popular culture demonstrate, potentially, a shift in beliefs. There is a common trend, no matter the generation, of youth culture fighting back against dominant older cultures. These days, young people want open forums and fewer groundless rules. They want a short sweet interpretable message rather than a long meaning that is set in stone and repetitive. They want honesty and sincerity, not a group of people under the facade of a loving community. Astrology has become a rebuttal to everything that organized religion is not. In these ways, it serves as a countercultural site playing out across social networking platforms and other online and physical practices. Youth culture wants to look to the stars and the future rather than staying locked in our ancient past.

A Relational Approach to Religion: My Experience with a Christian Non-profit

by Eliza Moore, Communication major

Growing up in South Carolina, I have been around religion and the church my whole life. I attended church services weekly, usually supplemented with a youth group or other various activities. While I did not necessarily have a bad experience with the church, what drew me more to Christianity was a non-profit ministry organization called Young Life. I was drawn to Young Life from an early age and started attending in early middle school. I enjoyed that it was catered to my age and was more focused on events. From the music to the message, all of it was more simplistic and I was able to grasp what Jesus actually meant for me personally. The way messages were shared was more applicable to my life and was spoken in a way that made sense to me as a middle schooler. Each week, Young Life’s main event “club” has a short talk at the end about the story from the Bible. At the end of each club, a leader stands up and gives a “talk” which is essentially a brief message about a story in the Bible. They are written in simplistic terms so anyone is able to understand what the leader is trying to convey. At this age, I often left church confused and quite honestly found it boring. Young Life club was vastly different from anything I had experienced in a church service. Club talks helped me understand what the Bible said about Christianity because they were always spoken in terms I could understand and comprehend. They were also spoken by college-aged leaders that I felt more comfortable listening to than my older male preacher. I felt like I could be myself around them because they weren’t as far from my stage of life, and could empathize with things I was going through. They were inviting, approachable, and welcoming. I was always included and invited into what they were speaking about, something vastly different from what I experienced as a youth in the church.

I additionally became involved because it was inclusive and anyone from my school was able to attend. I became even more involved in high school, as I was continually welcomed into this community. I served at a camp for a summer and was active in the events. This helped develop a relationship-driven version of religion in my life because I had people surrounding me and guiding me into what I was searching for in religion: purpose. In a quest to find a sense of meaning in my life, I have found that a relational approach has been the most consequential in giving me a sense of purpose. In the church I heard about a distant God that did not have much involvement in my personal life. Young Life described Jesus as a person who pursued me and wanted to befriend me. This changed my entire view of religion.

The “relational approach” of Young Life is essentially to meet kids where they are. Whether this is in a lunchroom, or at a sporting event, Young Life leaders were present in the same places I was. Young Life provided me with people that pushed me to discover what my purpose was, and created environments where I could discuss and delve into my purpose with others.

My leaders were greatly involved in my life and served a large role in my personal faith. They came to my track meets, planned fun events for me, and went out of their way to spend time with me. This form of “religion” stood out to me compared to what I had experienced in the church because it was relationally driven. My experiences with the church were primarily hearing a sermon or message then leaving. This form of ritual communication didn’t stick with me throughout the week. I often left what I heard in church inside the building, making my religion defined to a Sunday. It boxed my narrow view of religion into one day a week. Young Life offered me friends that wanted to walk alongside me throughout the entire week, as I was told about a God who was not just present on Sundays.

This could be viewed as a “subcultural” as it is distinct from but related to the dominant cultural practices of Christianity. While Young Life is separate from the institutional church, it serves a supporting role in creating a subcultural space specifically for the youth.

Because of my positive experiences with Young Life in high school, I am now a volunteer leader at a local high school. My motivation behind becoming a leader is to show high schoolers the care and intention my leaders showed me, and hope to show them a less rigid Christianity than what is pushed in so many churches. With a team of other college leaders, I help plan, promote, and facilitate weekly events while building relationships with high schoolers within the school.

The most impactful element of being a volunteer leader thus far has been taking some of my high school friends to camp. Each year, Young Life camps across the nation host a week-long camp experience for high schoolers and middle schoolers to attend. While camp has many fun activities and games, the purpose of camp is to share the story of the gospel over the course of a week. This is executed through daily “clubs” that end with a message, each sequentially going through a section of the gospel story as the week goes on. I have found this approach to Christianity different from others because it introduces kids to the story of the Gospel while still showing them that life as a Christian can still be fun and exciting. Young Life camp is also leader-centered. The leaders run daily “cabin time” discussions after the “talks” that help answer kid’s questions and guide them through what the speaker talks about. The leader also guides activities and games, while building relationships with the kids in their cabin. My experience as a leader at camp was impactful because I feel like I was able to build deeper relationships with my high school friends and carry those relationships into their lives at home as well. Typically, religious-affiliated summer camps hire counselors that befriend campers throughout the summer, then go home to a different place. I have found Young Life camp to be effective because leaders continue to be a part of a camper’s high school experience after the week of camp is over. I was able to hear about the lives of certain kids, then continue to be invested in their life when we got home.

Young Life has a mission to explain the gospel story in terms that students will understand. While this is accomplished in how the speakers communicate, it is also accomplished through creating an environment that high schoolers feel comfortable in. I think Young Life’s approach to religion is different from most religious institutions because it involves having fun and doing things catered to what they enjoy. It doesn’t just push a particular agenda; it invites kids into an exciting and inviting atmosphere. I have found great value in how Young Life has emphasized relationships in how it approaches Christianity.

I spoke with some consistent attendants of Pickens High Young Life, the high school where I lead. I asked them why they were drawn to Young Life and why they kept coming back. The consistent theme that arose from these conversations was that they were drawn relational aspect of Young Life. One student said she attends regularly because has been able to “form relationships with people I can’t find anywhere else; they have become my family.” Another high schooler said she is drawn to Young Life because it is “a place I feel comfortable, I never feel too embarrassed to participate.” I think these statements emphasize the relational approach Young Life has to religion. It is structured around building a sense of community within the school.

I have found many Christian non-profits to be useful in coming alongside the church by accomplishing a mission for a specific audience. The relational approach of Young Life to accomplish their “mission” has shaped my view of religion and what role I want it to play in my life. While Young Life has not pushed me away from the institutional church, it has helped me to better understand what Christianity means to my personal faith and provided me with a sense of community within my school. I was given the space to have fun and be myself as well as the space to be vulnerable with other people from my school. Because Young Life had such a large impact on my life, I became a leader to show other high schoolers that religion isn’t necessarily a rigid, monotonous practice that I experienced in the church I attended. I now consider my approach to religion relational because of the influence Young Life has had on my life. Its subcultural space serves a unique purpose because it places value on how youth are able to connect and grow with each other in a quest for purpose.