This article was directed toward the general public. Most people have no idea about the use of hashtags in twitter activism. The audience in this text is for those in United States to acknowledge the use of Twitter. People don’t realize how much effect that Twitter has in daily life, trends, and popularity of a topic. The author, Zeynep Tufekci, writes in this article how Twitter uses the popularity of hashtag to create a trending national topic. This is to educate the general public about the effect algorithmic filtering, lack of net neutrality and the internet in general. This article was written on a blogging platform that gives writers a free space to write story. This blogging platform, Medium, was founded by Twitter co-founders with the purpose of creating better content for social justice. This is very easily searchable on Google and other search engines. Anyone can find this articles/blogs on Medium. This article was published on August 14, 2014 a few days after the shooting of Michael Brown. Many people around the nation wanted to know about what was happening around Ferguson. I’m sure that this article popped on many searches to people around the nation during the time of the riots and protests in Ferguson.
The algorithm filtering that causes trends on social media is partially what made the Ferguson national news. The repetitive use of #Ferguson on Twitter put the Ferguson as a national trending news. The use of hashtags of Ferguson is what put Ferguson as a trend, but the same filtering algorithm that made Ferguson trend on Twitter causes a lack of net neutrality. Some things that only trend locally will stay local and not allow for the voiceless to be heard. They will get “filtered” out. Facebook has a filtering algorithm. Tufekci said that the night that Ferguson started trending Facebook feed were pretty quiet. However in the morning, posts were discovered written last night about Ferguson. Facebook’s algorithm had filtered those post out. As the more people engaged in the topic, more posts began to show up. Overall, Tufekci’s main idea in this article is how filter algorithms can effect social media positively and negatively. These algorithms now play a large role in our lives now.
The goal of this article is to educate the public about the net neutrality and algorithmic filtering and its effect on Ferguson. This article starts out with a small introduction to net neutrality. Tufekci introduces it as “a human rights issue; a free speech issue; and an issue of the voiceless being heard”. The author partially wants those who read this article to understand and advocate for net neutrality. However, Tufekci moves along quickly to algorithmic filtering and its effect on Ferguson. Though it did not directly change the actions surrounding Ferguson, it put the spotlight on the policing and race. Ferguson became a nationwide topic for weeks, but Tufekci wants the audience to analyze and understand why that is. She wants the audience to challenge and question the use of algorithmic filtering. Though she sees the positive effects that filters can have, she knows that it does not give everybody equality, where social media can control our thoughts.
I really enjoyed this article because I am especially interested in the events in Ferguson. I had never though that Twitter could be a cause of the blowup of #Ferguson. One social media where all races align in support each other. I appreciated how Tufekci mentioned both positive and negative effects of filtering algorithms. It really does puzzle me about how racial profiling and racism still occurs. It is rooted in our culture from the history of our country, but we seems to be stuck in the past. Though I never had to go through any racial hate, I see how it affects my friends in job applications, college applications and so on. They have to struggle and prove themselves more than others. Why does race have to be an issue? What would happen if no one had a designated race?
Tufecki in fact says that #ferguson did not become a national trending topic, though it did trend locally; it grew slowly so it didn’t meet the algorithmic definition of a trend. Yet because Twitter does not filter content, what people on the ground in Ferguson were tweeting began to reach a gradually bigger and bigger audience – because people were able to report on what was happening to them directly. Without the neutrality of every Twitter feed being exactly what people post (not filtered for interest), that would never have happened – and Tufecki is very concerned because that neutrality is at risk, since most of the content we engage with these days is algorithmically filtered.