HBO's hit series Westworld has captivated a large following over the past several years for its boldness to explore complex philosophical themes in an action-packed manner. I won't spoil much more, because witnessing the series firsthand without any prior context made my viewing experience well worth it. The first 15-20 minutes of the pilot episode were enough to get me hooked.
*Again, no spoilers*
The third season features a superintelligent A.I. unit called Rehoboam. Rehoboam was created by Incite, a futuristic tech company which has infiltrated every corner of society and holds massive amounts of data points about all of the world's citizens. The name "Rehoboam" is a reference to the Bible in which king Rehoboam was appointed over Israel yet struggled being faithful to God's will in his leadership over the Israelites. It was only when Rehoboam obeyed God's commands that his people prospered.
The purpose of Rehoboam is to establish control in the world through its "strategies" which makes that happen. Based on all sorts of personal data, Rehoboam predicts the future by analytically putting people on the right path for an optimal world. Some shots in the show cut back to a circle (pictured above) which demonstrates the world's upholding of the strategies. The smaller the circle is, the better the world is doing. Any occurrence which deviates from those strategies is known as a "divergence" and the sphere begins to expand (pictured below).
The system inspires the questioning of an illusion of free will, a popular theme in Westworld. This trailer for season three demonstrates how the events of the previous two seasons as well as fictional worldwide events throw a total wrench into Rehoboam's strategies (again, not going to spoil it. You really should watch it!)
This next video bills Incite as an optimization company for the world's citizens. It also makes them feel as though THEY are in control with their data and how Incite uses it according to its fictional CEO Liam Dempsey.
The quotes "The future is powered by you. And we know you" as well as Incite's slogan "If data is destiny, then you chart your path" are both particularly relevant to today's giant tech companies. They sound a lot like "google knows your search history" or "don't be evil."
This technology also eerily reminded me of the China social credit system which was featured in the Age of A.I. documentary. Similar features of China's system are shared by Rehoboam/Incite, including future prospects, bank loan credits, and ineligibility for certain jobs. However, unlike China the people in Westworld do not know about Rehoboam's strategies/control over their life's path. They believe they are acting on their own free will and that all of life's outcomes simply happen.
I think a Rehoboam system could frighteningly happen in today's world, since people (particularly Americans) are increasingly pivoting to be against Big Tech/Big Data due to a violation of privacy. We don't know just how many data points are on file at the big tech databases right now which are formulating every advertisement or search suggestion. For all we know, there could be a Rehoboam-type system out there right now...
Hope you watch Westworld! It's available streaming on HBO Max. The first two seasons are even better than season three.
After our EOTO presentations on misinformation, I wanted to look more into the history of propaganda. I have a limited understanding based on my high school history courses, so I wanted to expand my knowledge on the subject.
People tend to associate the word "propaganda" with promotion of world war efforts. However, propaganda itself has long existed outside the United States. The term was actually coined by the Pope Gregory XV Catholic Church for missionary activities in the year 1622. At the time, the word held a positive connotation as means of advancing the church's sphere of influence. Over time though, propaganda did turn negative in its inherent meaning.
The United States' entrance into World War I in particular led to the emergence of propaganda for nationalistic purposes. Citizens were encouraged to buy "war bonds" to help fund the army as a means of showcasing their patriotism. The iconic "I Want YOU for U.S. Army" poster of America's Uncle Sam encouraged young men to leave their domestic occupations and defend the ideals of capitalism.
In order for this pro-war effort to succeed, it required tremendous organization. The effort was spearheaded by none other than president Woodrow Wilson. For his 1916 re-election campaign, Wilson led with the slogan "He kept us out of war, America First." Wilson ran on the promises of staying out of wars in Europe. Yet shortly after his victory, Wilson reversed course and the U.S. entered "the war to end all wars." Entering this foreign conflict did not ring popular with the people of America, so Wilson devised methods of squashing any opposition. Wilson's congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917 as well as the Sedition Act of 1918, which enforced strict penalties and even prison time for both government employees and private persons respectively on speaking out against the war effort. Wilson also created the Committee on Public Information (CPI) which helped sway public opinion in favor of the war effort. In retrospect, restricting dissenting opinions against the government seems to be indicative of a communist state, the very ideology which the U.S. was fighting against. It also goes against the wording of the first amendment "Congress shall make no law" in regards to abridging freedom of speech.
Modern propaganda can most likely be associated to President Trump's campaign and leadership. Trump ran on the slogan of "Make America Great Again" and similar to Wilson promised governing with a focus on "America First." Although Trump did not pass any legislation to sway public opinion, he used his bully pulpit, particularly Twitter, to further galvanize his base. Some of his posts included slander of President Obama's birth place, media attacks on Muslims, and vehement opposition of racial justice movements such as National Anthem protesting and Black Lives Matter. Trump even used the word "propaganda" when referring to racial sensitivity training which he opposed. Although Trump is now removed from office, his leadership has undoubtedly given rise to alt-right groups such as QAnon who believe a secret cabal cult runs the world and is responsible for Trump's general election loss. Even in the digital age, propaganda penetrates public opinion.
The human race's appetite for information and knowledge arrived at its most evolved form with the invention of the internet. This super network transformed the most basic elements of everyday life and brought about a new, exciting chapter in innovation. What makes the internet a crutch of 21st century civilization is the blazing speed of access to this ultimate database. This is known as network neutrality, a long-standing principle that internet service providers (ISPs) must provide all content requested by its consumers at equal speed. Many in America were not aware of this concept until a recent move by the Trump administration and FCC Chairman Ajit Pai who repealed these rules in 2018. In order to understand why the move was received with such vehement opposition, we need to take a deeper dive into the inner workings of mankind's greatest creation.
The term "net neutrality" first appeared in a 2003 academic essay written by Columbia University law professor Tim Wu entitled, "Network Neutrality, Broadband Discrimination." In the essay, Wu explained that it would be a future struggle to ensure a free and open internet could exist despite corporate interests, "Communications regulators over the next decade will spend increasing time on conflicts between the private interests of broadband providers and the public’s interest in a competitive innovation environment centered on the Internet."
Net neutrality forces all content into the same lanes (Graphic Courtesy: BBC News)
Perhaps the most popular analogy to the concept of net neutrality could be made to cars driving on a highway. The owner of the highway is the Internet Service Provider (ISP) and the cars are the various content providers. Under the concept of net neutrality, big cable companies such as AT&T or Comcast are obligated to have all internet traffic travel to customers at the same speed. Tech giants such as Google, Amazon, or Facebook can't push their content to the front of the line.
Behold, the Silicon Valley Hyperspeed Lane which can appear without Net Neutrality
Yet when net neutrality disappears, companies have the ability to bid up their content and thus push it across other platforms easier. As a result, this creates an additional big tech fast lane so they can reach consumers quicker than they previously could. Some ISPs favor this model by arguing less government regulation plus a premium charge on reaching consumers will allow for more competition and better infrastructure since the big tech companies take up such a large amount of bandwidth anyways. However, it appears as though the result could be the opposite effect in that Silicon Valley could outgun smaller sources and corner the market on information little by little thus eliminating competition.
Perhaps the most famous case of rising content costs came in 2014. In those seemingly distant days, Netflix was really starting to hit their stride with streaming and it was becoming clearer every day that they were the future of TV. Of course, Netflix's wild popularity meant it thinly stretched the bandwidth of ISPs. Download speeds tanked and customers began to complain to their providers about the abysmal service. Comcast and other providers insisted they did not slow down content but instead demanded Netflix help improve the infrastructure to improve the customers' experience.
If you take a close look, you can see right where the deal came into effect in early 2014
Sure enough, Netflix bent the knee and reached an agreement in which they would pay more to Comcast in order to reach consumers properly but not preferentially. A New York times article on the deal observed that this also came 10 days after Comcast's $45 billion acquisition of Time Warner Cable, putting the Philadelphia-based cable juggernaut in roughly one out of every three homes in America for both TV and internet. The deal raised many eyebrows around the business world, particularly because the settlement amount was not publicized. Tim Wu commented on the deal as well, “This is the water in the basement for the Internet industry... I think it is going to be bad for consumers."
Later that same year, President Obama took action in order to preserve net neutrality. The legal precedent for doing so came from the Telecommunications Act of 1996. This act clearly defined two types of service: Title I providers were for information service whereas Title II providers were for telecommunications service. Obama began pushing the FCC to apply these rules to ISPs, “You don’t want to start getting a differentiation in how accessible the Internet is to different users. You want to leave it open so the next Google and the next Facebook can succeed.” In February of 2015, the FCC voted in favor of defining ISPs as Title II common carriers for providing internet which required them to treat all content the same. A federal court of appeals upheld the ruling in June of 2016. The internet was safe. Until....
The Trump administration went right to work using their platforms as referendums on the Obama administration's actions. Repealing this ruling of net neutrality was among them. Trump's appointee of Ajit Pai to FCC Chairman condemned the Title II regulations as an example of government overreach and argued this ruling would inhibit the infrastructure of internet access to rural areas. Pai pitched this proposal as a way of "restoring internet freedom" as ISPs could potentially expand without burdensome requirements relating to the treatment of internet traffic. On Dec. 14, 2017, the FCC reached a landmark ruling which changed the definition of internet service providers from Title II common carriers to Title I information services, effectively ending net neutrality. The ruling received major pushback on several social media platforms, with consumer groups feeling outraged that the rich and powerful companies were getting bailed out yet again. In response, Ajit Pai posted a video saying what people were still allowed to do on the internet. The original was taken down, but this backup copy of the video received 12,000 likes compared to an astonishing 283,000 dislikes.
So what's next for net neutrality? The election of Joe Biden has galvanized hope that perhaps the rules could be reversed again to reclassify ISPs under Title II. Biden already appointed former two-term commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel as acting chair of the FCC and still has one more confirmation to make. That confirmation would swing the balance of the FCC in favor of the Democrats and we very well could see the reinstating of net neutrality. Until then, the fate of the internet hangs in the balance...
![Anti-Communism Propaganda from the First Red Scare Between 1918-1921 [Capitalist] | Cold war propaganda, American propaganda, Cold war](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a3/6c/c4/a36cc457d748d0419072d1d62fc1fccb.jpg)
