Erase social media tomorrow? Brits say yes

Just 7 percent of Brits think social media is a force for good and around one in three suspect that life would get better if all these sites were erased from the internet tomorrow. Or so claims Opinium Research, which describes itself as a strategic insight agency." It polled 2,000 adults and 1,100 parents in September and The Register's major surprise is that more people of Britland didn't want to see social media rubbed out. Some 42 percent surveyed said these networks are addictive, and half think they are worse for society now than they were in 2010 as they contain false or misleading information and the algorithms dictate what they see, making public debate more divisive. More than half reckon the rot set in due to commercialization, yet one in ten admitted buying products every day via the platforms in the last year with around a fifth doing so every week and 12 percent claiming they discover new brands via their feeds daily. Irrespective of the negative sentiments, 49 percent use social media more now than they did 16 years ago, and a third use it a lot more. 31 percent are more using it to view content than post themselves. When there's so much bot slop and political propaganda to chew through, who has time to upload pictures of, er, cats or the meals they made for themselves? More emphatically, seven in ten people surveyed support fines for social media businesses whose platforms expose under-16s to harmful content. Britain has tried to tackle this and a social media ban for that age group is in the offing. The research was not commissioned by any commercial or government entity, Opinium told The Register it was designed as a thought leadership piece." It lands a week before The Social Reckoning hits the cinemas, Aaron Sorkin's sequel to his critically acclaimed The Social Network, a film that cast Mark Zuckerberg in a less than favorable light. The digital ditch has widened in the past five years since Elon Musk bought Twitter - a tool used by a tool to sow seeds of discontent. Some of the glorious leaders of social media empires have also kowtowed to US President Donald Trump, emboldening those with opinions some may consider racist or sexist. Trump threatened to send Zuck to prison if he was re-elected, branding him a so-called election fraudster." Trump lost the 2020 election and there is no evidence he lost it due to fraud. The depressing fact is that more Brits are shovelling social media up their nose than ever before. According to Statista, 55.5 million are signed up, compared to 29.4 million in 2010. This is despite people knowing it is addictive, has ruined the quality of public discourse, and wrecked privacy - we all know none of these platforms are truly free; users pay with their data. This vulture's account on X is mostly unused, though he is testing out Bluesky, which seems to be a gentler and kinder version of the artist formerly known as Twitter. He deleted Facebook years ago and never looked back (yes, including the data it held in its datacenter). And you can't find him on Instagram or Snapchat or anything else used to socialize" or argue with other humans. The UK's latest Prime Minister - the seventh in ten years - last week announced a center to fight misinformation. If that had been in place around the time leading up to the Brexit vote in 2016, maybe the country could have countered alleged Russian interference. Perhaps other divisive forces in British politics would have crawled back under a rock. Then again, Trump did enjoy a second coming. So what to do? Apart from Reg readers and the quality of the comments they add to our articles, should the internet should become a read-only medium? Terminating social media might be a first step in the right direction. (R)