In 1993 a movie starring Tom Hanks was released (which he won an Oscar for) that many people do not remember titled [Philadelphia](, and it was about the rise in the HIV/AIDS epidemic sweeping across America (as it had been for some time at that point), and dealt with the cultural response(s) to it. A landmark film, and it changed the public’s narrative surrounding what is now *known* and *acknowledged* as a serious virus that must be taken seriously.nnCurrently, there is no modern-day equivalent to the COVID-19 pandemic which has already taken millions of lives. Now, in 2021 (and before (and probably after)) there *is* no “media center” with which to bring about any type of “movement” or “change”. The only common denominator for everyone (literally, every single human being in the developed world) is that of smartphones. That, and the social networks that are inevitably downloaded *onto* them as soon as one (a smartphone) is acquired. So, the capture time that social networks have over the people in First World countries is astounding, unparalleled, and undisputed in comparison to literally every single source of media (“media” being “a medium”) in human history.nnSo, where does the power lie in all of this? How *could* a narrative (of *any* kind) be changed or altered in a positive manner (or even simply a *truthful* manner) during a worldwide pandemic that could save the lives of countless people?nnWell, the “power” comes down to not *just* social media platforms (such as Facebook and Twitter), but the **algorithms** utilized ON those platforms – which, at this point in time, have been utilized to maximize **engagement** (or, **reaction**) for any given (social media) platform. And it isn’t about wholesale “re-doing” or “re-writing” the algorithms, themselves, but rather just SUBTRACTING algorithmic use altogether on any given platform. nnPeople sometimes complain of “algorithmic bias” (which is a real thing), or “algorithmic radicalization of citizens of a certain country”, or “algorithmic suppression” of citizens of other regions, still. There is “algorithmic censorship”, “algorithmically-produced (impulse) shopping”, and the list goes on and on. nnIronically, people have probably *heard* all of these terms before (and they have certainly been written about in a more eloquent way than I have here). But make no mistake – Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, and any/every social platform under the sun would have significantly less power and the world at-large would be significantly more EMpowered (and confident, less anxious, more self-assured, less timid, etc.) should algorithms be stripped away at any given social platform.nnIt’s something to keep an eye on. A sort of “eye on the prize” element to what would have to be addressed by lawmakers (which is basically already happening with anti-trust lawsuits) should this government (or even the people of the developed world, themselves (whom still think they have the ultimate say *over* government (which I do not think they do – another rant for another time))) decide that *they*, the law MAKERS decide what is allowed and disallowed in the country which they reside – you know, like MAKING an actual LAW.nnBut me, I’d say (from where I’m sitting) the entire ordeal is a clusterfuck. A terrific example of a scenario that is neither manageable nor irreversible. The narrative that was put forward (and repeated by me for a long time) was that “it’s up to the individual to decide” if they are going to use a social media platform or not. But *MANY* people do not feel like this (social media use) is in any way a choice that is within their grasp, their ability, or even their best interest. nnSo, make of that what you will. Obviously, “just leaving” a social platform is the way to go, but countless others can’t or won’t or feel as if they don’t have a choice in the matter – so, instead of trying to convince umpteen people in your life (let alone billions on Earth) to exit a platform, then the least that can be done is to vote for the candidates running for office who WILL vote in favor of *intense* social media regulation and restrictions.nnI think that’s all there is to say about it.nnBack later

Subscribe to from the desk of TMO

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.