How Social Media Magnifies Extreme Views – and Methods to Counteract It
Helena Puig Larrauri is a cofounder of Build Up and an Ashoka Fellow. Her work spans countries like the U.S., Iraq, and others in changing the dynamics of conflict radically in the digital age. She sees one big problem driving rising polarization catalyzed by viral content on social media, so poses an interesting way to systematically change the standing rule: What if platforms were financially liable for the societal harm they amplify? Will a tax on polarization, as with carbon taxes, be what finally motivates companies to reconsider their impact? This discussion traces the history of online polarization and lays out why platforms bear responsibility in mitigating its negative impacts.
Peace-builder Helena Puig Larrauri has been a pioneer in using digital technologies to raise inclusiveness in peace and democratic processes worldwide. For example, in Yemen, where logistic integration of women into peace talks was difficult, she resorted to WhatsApp as a secure means of bridging that gap. However, the darker side is one of the pivotal problems that digital tools pose in surveillance to manipulation, further driving the dynamics of conflict.
His work from places like northeast Iraq has illustrated how social media discourses display increased sectarian polarization that boosts affective elements of polarization separating and stratifying people through sectarian affiliations. It erodes healthy debate—the core process of democratic and peace processes—through replacement by opposition with escalatory possibilities of groups.
She does so in a manner Puig Larrauri claimed current content moderation practices do badly, namely attending to the larger issue of affective polarization. Hate speech is recognizable and, hence, manageable, while narratives of fear are not, even though they might as such instigate violence. It proves the need for change at the systemic level, not just content removal.
The architecture of social media algorithms, in the pursuit of higher user engagement, inadvertently boosts polarizing content. An ad-revenue-based business model is perpetuated through prolonged user interaction, which fuels on such division in society. Puig Larrauri sees an analogy between environmental pollution and proposes a tax framework to internalize the social costs of polarization, similar to carbon emissions.
By calling for a polarization tax, Puig Larrauri provides a proactive measure to have platforms take on less polarizing content moderation strategies, which will encourage changes in algorithm design away from engagement metrics that nurture polarization. The measures will link platform profitability with social welfare while refraining from compromising freedom of speech.
The innovative perspective Puig Larrauri offers questions current paradigms of the digital governance landscape and urges a revisit to platform responsibilities within the shaping of global discourse. Her proposal opens a critical debate about how technological development might align democratic values and how social media could be steered toward inclusive, constructive dialogues.
