Tragedy of Commons and Social Media

Tragedy of commons is already articulated and known. A problem. A problem that had and continues to plague distribution of public, economic, social and environmental goods. For the purpose of a quick draft, lets leave the tragedy of commons as a suggestion, a hint --that gathers and populates memory-- unarranged for the moment, acting as a background.

Social networks and media do give rise to a common -- a virtual community*. They generate issues that are different from the tragedy that holds the commons. In the case of virtual platforms someone takes the 'trouble' of maintaining -- a common. This virtual Common is maintained and sustained through posts and status updates by individuals in the form of texts, pictures, memes, videos and arranged largely by an algorithm, a software application.

With tragedy of commons, the common go unattended or fail to generate interest and incentive in tending and attending a common and that lead to various problems. Solutions that tragedy of commons throw is always incomplete, partial. Virtual social platforms are brought about by advances in digital and communication technology. Participation is technologically mediated in virtual commons. Social media and virtual network is maintained by companies — management of data, algorithms, bots, agreement with users, tech and ‘public’ policies to regulate content of posts and updates — goes into it. The modes of partaking in this virtual common turns participation in this format to — data.

Information, control and circulation of information is crucial for ruling/governing and state; they also affect local, regional, national and global groups and communities. Information and its circulation decides — who gets to know, what, and when. Control and circulation of information has a direct bearing on opinions and beliefs one can form, hold, propagate, profess or revise.

Before the advent of digital medium hiding and concealing information was the key, the secrets and offices belonged exclusively and largely to state. Information was/is regulated and access depended on classification. Vital and crucial information could be declared classified by the state. So, democratic minded demanded accountability, transparency and accurate and right information from state and its institutions.

Now with social networks and new technological mediation’s information can be made available quickly and its spread is wider. This could have made hiding and concealing accurate, useful and right information difficult; in the process rendering governments and corporations, communities more accountable and transparent. However, it remained a promise, an unfulfilled possibility. 

 The promise of more transparency and accountability failed largely due to misinformation and disinformation which crowds virtual and technologically mediated spaces. In this context, distorting information becomes as important as hiding and concealing, if not more. These two techniques of controlling information and its circulation, i.e., hiding and concealing and distortion now usually combines.

One central reason virtual social network has assumed importance is that they invest in maintaining a community for the individual in a novel, useful and meaningful way. An arena where State and other social, cultural and religious groups have regularly been falling short. Virtual commons draws individuals and summons groups and communities, where — inadequacy, bonds, interest, profit, anchorage, float — together. Social media and virtual network present themselves as a space for individual freedom of expression, sustain virtual but constant and instant connect with the trustworthy, familiar and known. They also offer a possibility to connect with unknown and unfamiliar while one pursues common interest or is busy raising awareness or searching for fellow travelers.

Perhaps the most significant aspect of virtual social platforms lies in facilitating an individual to turn into a broadcaster and telecast their message to an audience. The reality, possibility of extending and limits of that audience is the strength of this medium.

The modern promise : a widening of horizon, a real chance of coming together, bringing a change, leading a more productive and meaningful life, even after virtual social media/networks eludes us.

Virtual social networks can and have become very large and influential and in the process affect outcomes in other spheres — economic, social, cultural and political. The new form and format of participation and dissemination of information — data — and capability to circulate information for a wide audience is now a vital and critical resource. These networks/media, can threaten state’s monopoly over information. The information monopoly the virtual social platforms augment and capability to circulate information quickly, while maintaining a reach that overlaps and surpasses the print, television and cable audiences has began to threaten democracy.

Apart from information monopoly 'threat' to democratic and well-ordered societies morphs into other forms at virtual social media/networks. Virtual social network offer space for bonding and connecting they also accumulate hatred, turn into a medium for venting prejudice, spread conspiracy and incite disorder, even violence. Its an undeniable fact that redundant and decaying social forms and connections are being rediscovered and forged by virtual social platforms. On the plus side social media and virtual network has revitalised some existing commons and contributed to few 'new' meaningful associations transcending existing divisions and borders.

Threat and various forms it takes is one aspect of virtual networks and social media. They perform various other roles and tasks for individuals and communities and some of them uniquely. Once virtual social network become large, they appear necessary for existing social groups, whether they are clearly primary, secondary or even tertiary.

With increased mobility and movement of people, virtual social network are more real for many people than the secondary and interest groups one is or was a part of. People are not actually goods in boxes but the changes in technology and transportation demands that they pack their lives and be mobile, willing to live out of boxes. Virtual social networks fit in and play a crucial role for individuals in precisely this rapidly changing and demanding environment of earning livelihood. When people end up at places other than where they grew up maintaining touch and contact assumes importance. Social media facilitates dissemination of information and sustains and enhances opportunity to collaborate. These contexts in their turn add value to social network and social media.

The economic and political institutions of society, then, tend to lean on virtual social network. If not for direct distribution of goods and services, social media and virtual network help in receiving feedback for traditional and modern institutions. Political communities and conversation also begin to depend on them for circulation, relevance and expansion.

Virtual communities has been brought into existence through technological platforms-- the social for the late moderns. This technological possibility has developed largely through private initiative, largely outside the institutions of state, relying on private technical expertise and mobilisation of resources. They are also enterprises and ventures and generate revenue and data. Ignoring the economic aspect of technologically mediated virtual social networks/media, then, is not an available option. Data they say is like mine, data mining has its own economics. How the virtual 'social' impacts and threatens the privacy of the individual is another issue that one cannot loose sight off. The private companies have learnt and mastered how to make profit out of data.They maintain the virtual platform but do other things as well that are prima facie not deleterious; and as such present and represent the janus-faced capitalism. When one uses a service for 'free' or with a fee losing control over data is an unstated part of this deal or contract? Facts like these are neither hidden nor revealed by social media and virtual networks.

State has lagged behind in creating virtual social network but is willing to allow private enterprises to proliferate in this direction. If, virtual social network harm, exploit and use the citizen’s posts and updates for profit, State's see a limited role for itself and for protecting their citizens. States typically demand that ‘data’ is kept within shores and made available to them, when demanded for maintaining law and order and security related issues. That is were the bounds of protection through law for citizen's ends. Citizens are left in the lurch between the state and big tech.

 

There is a quid pro quo, a convergence of interests between state and those who maintain virtual social network. State's usually do not use that sensitive information generated by participation of individuals for profit but to police the population-- its own citizens and others. Social media and virtual network participation data can be used by the state to identify and track law-breakers and criminals and politics deploys these data to indicate enemies.

 

Virtual social platforms are different, but clearly, they have not been able to avoid, bypass or overcome the tragic that felled the commons.

 

* A virtual community and virtual commons is distinct from digital commons. The idea, working design and implications drawn from the tragedy of commons has evolved, adopted and flourished from Hardin to Ostrom in many directions.