This week’s readings cut through the technical jargon surrounding “software platforms” describing them as intermediary, second-order infrastructures that build upon physical infrastructures that usually take between thirty and one hundred years to fully develop. According to Edwards, such platforms (for example Facebook and YouTube) spread across the globe like wildfire due to their strategic architectural features which allow the platform’s core components to interface with new and innovative complementary components as needed. A defining feature of these platforms is that they position themselves as neutral spaces for user activity, “what we might call ‘platform discourse’ is to render the platform itself as a stable, unremarkable, unnoticed object, a kind of empty stage” (Edwards 319). Kurgan et al., however, contend in “Homophily” using Facebook’s example that the way these platforms operate is far from neutral. Social networks like Facebook group people with similar interests, showing them friend suggestions and content based on their interests only thereby creating a feedback loop that doesn’t allow for diverse viewpoints or knowledge. Such algorithmic practices on a large scale over time lead to polarization with these software platforms having a very real impact on societal and cultural perceptions. Showing users only content that they like while ignoring the adverse impact that has on society at large is because user activity on these platforms yields raw material in the form of data. According to Srnicek, capitalism in the twenty-first century is centered around the extraction and use of data for advertising purposes, worker optimization, etc. Platforms are so important now because they facilitate the collection of this data.

Question One: In Platform Capitalism Srnicek notes that advertising platforms sell users’ online activities to adeptly matched advertisers to sell consumers more products. Has there ever been a case where the data from these software platforms was used to specifically create products that match users’ needs instead of just selling them existing products? Would data extraction be a less exploitative process if that information was used to create products based on trends that indexed what consumers wanted?

Question Two: In the Age of Surveillance Capitalism Zuboff contends that surveillance capitalism was invented in the US though the consequences now belong to the world. Considering his “no exist” metaphor, would Gen Z outside the US in less developed countries like Kenya and Ghana have more of a backstage to nurture the self since these platforms would not be used as readily there due to technological limitations/internet issues as they would have been in the US?

Question Three: Srnicek points out that now companies like Amazon and Microsoft own the software instead of the physical product allowing them to employ a subscription model for their users. Considering these subscription services necessitate continuous internet access would people in developing countries be at a disadvantage because of such a requirement? Could not owning a product for indefinite use—as opposed to the subscription model—hinder people from less technologically advanced regions from making use of it?

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.