"Every individual... neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it... he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention... by pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." - Adam Smith, 1776

This idea of market economics is no longer applicable to fields that have surpassed the strength of human will and hijack the mechanisms of attention.

Brief human history.

Technology has evolved with humanity for millennia. Some evolution theories propose the divergence of humans from the great apes was a result of smaller, weaker chimpanzee communities harnessing tools to become stronger and eventually more intelligent animals. Since that first ape family, technology supported the improvement in quality of life for every socio-economic class. Remarkably, the last 70 or so years of technology has been more impactful than the entirety of human evolution preceding it. With the age of computers, the world has accelerated to light speed in development, globalization, and innovation. Massive improvements to quality of life have been made in almost every part of the world, bringing prosperity to innovative nations and opportunity to developing economies.

For the first time in history, technology is being engineered to cripple the user. Social media and fast-form media (Tik Tok, Instagram Reels, YouTube Shorts) are designed to keep a user captivated instead of providing true value. Depression and anxiety are higher than ever before. Despite enjoying the highest quality of life in human history, we have never been less happy.

Here’s why.

It may be easy to blame big tech companies, prioritizing profits over consumer well-being and neglecting to inform people of the risks that come with their products. Personally, I wouldn’t blame a company for making their stake holders money. Instead, I’d bring attention (pun intended) to the structures put in place to address a somewhat similar problem.

A perfectly free market puts all the power in the consumer – that is, the consumers decide what products are most successful. In tech, we have a generally free market. This is great for innovative companies and almost always yields the best technology. The question is how do we define best? When technology is designed to be used as a tool, the best technology is almost always best for the consumer. The problem arises when technology is engineered to override the human reward system, creating products that feel equally as useful to a consumer but in reality, provide little true value.

Does this remind you of anything?

Fast-form media is an addictive substance. Take alcohol, cannabis, or any other recreation that are known to have negative consequences on the general public. There are heavy regulations on who can sell them, the contents of the products, and most certainly a minimum age.

Advanced ML algorithms + smooth UI = alcohol and drugs?

Some might say this is an extreme parallel. That’s up for you to decide. Depression, anxiety, suicide, divorce, and many more metrics of societal decline have been linked to the creation of these technologies that undeniably have decreased overall happiness in the world. What other metric would you use to measure the success of the world than overall happiness? What really matters if our society is chronically online?

It’s time to start treating malicious technologies by their impacts on society. An entire generation has grown up comparing themselves to everything else, looking at this beautiful world through 60 second videos with audio and visuals designed to addict a developing brain. The solution is not to remove these technologies, rather to impose responsible regulations that are difficult to impose because our laws were designed for the economics of 1776.

Americans are frustrated with bias and misinformation in the media. Media trust is at an all time low, with 36% of Americans have no trust in the media (Axios 24, Gallup 24). This has led to a major societal issue facing the west: polarization. 95% of Americans say this is a problem, with 81% citing it as a major problem (Pearson 21). The problem is not that the media is inherently evil, rather, Adam Smith's invisible hand has led the industry astray. A single article is optimized to be read by the highest number of people. This typically leads the article to make more bold claims, take polarizing stances, and cover dividing subjects. Again, this is simple economics: articles take time and money to make, so they must also attract enough attention to make them profitable.

AI fundamentally changes the industry. To make a truly good media company, you don’t actually need the most number of clicks per article - you just need the most number of clicks. As the cost of content goes down, this becomes crucial. Personalization changes the game. A media company can make many times more content, and as long as the right ones are shown to the right people, the business is just as profitable - and much more sticky. In a world where content is nearly free to make and personalization is an API call, media should be much different…