The Social Dilemma Worksheet

Group 3

1. There is a collection of news clips from 1:10:44-1:11:37; what is the main idea the
filmmakers are trying to communicate?

The collection of clips from 1:10:44-1:11:37 aims to visualize the severe impacts
of social media on the perception and political opinions of an individual belonging to a
democratic society. This visualization suggests the idea that social media has ironically
become a tool against freedom, affecting the entitlement of a society to choose their
government leaders. The original intention of social media from its innovation has
become discarded, turning into a channel of manipulation used by big entities to interfere
with supposedly democratic, clean elections.

2. The filmmakers start to use an increased mix of news/drama/interviews here. Why

do you think that is? What is the effect?

By making this documentary, the filmmakers’ ultimate goal is to convey to their

viewers what the social dilemma is, why it is happening, and how it was brought about.
They employed a mixture of snippets of news and headlines, interviews, and narrative
drama as a call to action, to persuade viewers to respond to the problems posed in the
film. The news is used to introduce talking points that are later expounded on in the
interviews and demonstrated in the dramas. Since the content of this— the headlines,
brief extracts from news reports, etc.— would be familiar to the viewers, the filmmakers
are able to introduce new topics in a subtle manner while simultaneously linking it to
real-life examples for better understanding. Interviews by tech professionals and insiders
to the industry help reveal the methods or the process by which tech giants in the social
media and search industry allow their end-users to be manipulated, disclosing details of
what the previously presented news snippets only hinted at. Together, the news and the
interviews build a good, investigative backbone for the documentary. Inserting sections
of narrative drama into this mixture adds to the film’s explanatory power, as it is able to
present the situation from both the perspective of someone who can be considered
complicit in the design of this social dilemma and the perspective of any ordinary user
who is affected by these designs. Moreover, the dramatization of how tech firms are able
to collect data and utilize this to “sell us” to the highest bidders and hence allow our
manipulation simplifies and makes the explanations previously mentioned by the
interviewees easier to digest. Mixing these all together and switching between them
frequently mimics how quickly we can be led around by virtue of our online presence and
activities and adds to the feeling of urgency and hastiness that we feel when using social
media and search engines.
3. There is a clip of Mark Zuckerberg testifying quickly followed by an interview with
Cathy O’Neil (the woman with blue hair). What is the effect of juxtaposing these
two clips back to back?

The clip of Cathy O’Neil discussing Mark Zuckerberg’s claim during his
testimony gives audiences a glimpse of the truth behind the actions of these technological
giants. In his testimony, Zuckerberg claims that technological innovations can lead to the
development of AI that would solve the issue of fake news. This is immediately followed
by the interview clip with O’Neil, who states that technologists like Zuckerburg are not
equipped to solve issues like these. These clips are the exact opposite; one is a claim
about the need for more AI tools to deal with the problem of fake news, and the other is
about the incapacity of technology to be the solution to this exact problem. This
juxtaposition shows the viewers that such claims— regardless of who they are from—
cannot be seen as the truth, and that there is always more to what is being sold to us at
face value. As someone people would typically trust when it comes to technology due to
his status as a technological giant, audiences would expect his words to hold true. As
such, the immediate clip of O’Neil negating his statement would throw viewers off and
lead them to likely even question all of Zuckerberg’s statements. It is used to further push
the message the documentary is trying to put out— that we have become so brainwashed
by social media that we have become oblivious to the realities of technology— and
pushes audiences to critically evaluate what they already know about technology.

4. From 1:15:00-1:17:12, there is a combination of animation/dramatization plus a

Lanier interview clip that are all combined and working together in a way we
haven’t seen before in this documentary. What elements are being combined? Why
tie all of this together instead of spreading it out?

1:15:00-1:17:12 presents to its audience an uninterrupted succession of

interview/testimony clips from experts within the field, followed by the dramatization of
the algorithm’s inner workings. In the latter part of this animated segment, audio from
Lanier’s interview is also imposed into the scene as a voiceover. As his discussion shifts
from the concept of the super brain to the implications of this issue on us, the scene then
cuts to him on screen speaking.

In essence, these 2 minutes are the culmination of the narrative of the past hour of
the documentary: that our constant social media use poses more threats than what we are
aware of. In particular, the use of diegetic and non-diegetic sounds across the succeeding
clips brings the entire message of the documentary together. To illustrate, in the animated
section, the conversations of the AI alongside the somber background music intensify the
 terrifying yet undeniable reality of the role technology has played in our lives. This
combination maximizes the delivery of the message as it intensifies the horror and
disgust that this realization invokes. Moreover, the superimposition of Lanier’s interview
audio onto the latter part of the animation— where the scene zooms out to show the
hundreds of AIs— allows even non-technologically literate audiences to better visualize a
concept that would otherwise be foreign and confusing, which in turn enhances their
understanding of the gravity of the issue.

All in all, the ultimate goal of these conclusory 2 minutes is to drive across the
perilousness of the problem it has been trying to convey— the true dangers that lie
behind social media— and to leave audiences with a lasting impression that would shape
the way they interact with the technology that surrounds them.

5. From 1:24:46-1:26:00, we see an interview clip with Justin Rosenstein that starts,
“We live in a world where a tree is worth more dead than alive…” Why do we see
such a long, uninterrupted interview clip? How does this message connect to the
overall message of the documentary?

In this specific segment of the documentary, Justin Rosenstein talks about how
exploitation will continue as long as it is profitable– if trees and whales are worth more
dead than alive, then humanity will continue to kill them. Even though it is known that
the long-term effects of such a practice are harmful, society will continue to allow it, so
long as it yields monetary profits. Tying this into the overall purpose of the documentary,
Rosenstein claims that capturing human attention has become the next profitable
endeavor that corporations are seeking to exploit. “Our attention can be mined”,
Rosenstein emphasizes. Corporations have figured out how to capture the attention of the
mass population– and how to exchange this attention for financial gains. Even though
studies have shown that this practice is ultimately harmful to the lives and psyches of the
people, companies will continue to build on their exploitative techniques with no regard
for regulation or control, as doing so will reap the most profit. The documentary
emphasizes this message in order to highlight the need for people to take action. We
cannot rely on companies growing conscientious and stopping themselves before they do
too much damage. The desire and greed for wealth will continue to escalate in a digital
arms race for the attention of the public unless the public takes action to regulate such
techniques.

On another note, it is interesting to see how the documentary uses this whole,
uncut interview clip in order to elicit more reflections from the audience. With the focus
of the interview being human attention, leaving an extended interview clip can be seen as
 a subtle test of how long our attention spans will allow us to listen to what Rostentein has
to say. In the age of social media, where attention is a luxury and people are getting more
and more used to short-form content, are we still capable of maintaining our attention
long enough to hear the whole interview clip out? As a result, creative choice helps the
documentary promote a secondary layer of reflection, encouraging people to realize
exactly how much social media has influenced them and their thinking habits.

6. Focus on the last two minutes before the credits. How does the documentary
conclude? What do you see and hear? What impression or ideas are the filmmakers
trying to get you to leave with?

During the last two minutes of The Social Dilemma, the interviewees state that the
“attention extraction model” that social media companies use nowadays is detrimental to
society as a whole. Moreover, they emphasize that although it is the technologists’
responsibility to change social media, we also have the responsibility to demand products
to be designed humanely and for us not to be treated as an extractable resource. This
serves as a call to action for viewers to rise up and challenge the current state of the
technological industry and not just be passive victims of social media. It is even
mentioned that critics are the true optimists as it is the critics who drive improvement.
This contributes to the optimistic tone of the conclusion since it gives the impression that
not all hope is lost with regard to technology’s effects on our society.

The dramatization in the conclusion further enhances the message that the
filmmakers of The Social Dilemma wish us to leave with. Throughout this documentary,
Ben is manipulated by the “evil AIs” who get to decide what appears in his social media
feed and who stop at nothing to stoke his addiction to social media. Nevertheless, near
the end of the documentary, the programmers alter the code for a social media platform,
and the music swells, representing how change is happening at last. This is followed up
by a close shot of Ben’s model which looks hyper-realistic and even blinks, reminding
viewers that social media platforms are toying with the emotions of real, living, breathing
human beings. In addition, the “evil AIs” disappear and are replaced by “good AI,” and
this shift in morality is highlighted by the modification in the color of the jacket from
black to white. The algorithms for the “attention extraction model” on the console
disappear, and gentle instrumental music starts playing in the background, creating a new
atmosphere of positivity and cooperation that is free from manipulation. The model of
Ben is no longer held by strings at this point, and his feet land on the ground for the first
time, symbolizing how he finally has control over his own life. Then, there is a close up
dolly shot of Ben’s feet as he walks forward; this helps viewers to relate to Ben as Tristan
Harris is convincing us to demand change too. The “good AI” moves forward to meet
him as well, showing how technology companies are now respecting their users. Last but
 not the least, in contrast to the medium shots of the “evil AIs” in the rest of the
documentary, the last camera shot of the “good AI” is a close shot, demonstrating how
the relationship between technology and humans has grown from being manipulative and
controlling to being more healthy and harmonious. Therefore, all of these go to show
what could happen if we manage to persuade social media companies to treat us as
human beings instead of “voodoo dolls” that they can play around with for profit.

Overall, in contrast to the dystopian narrative that runs throughout the rest of The
Social Dilemma, the documentary concludes on a hopeful note as the filmmakers express
the idea that change is still possible. Nevertheless, this is under the condition that we
collectively stand up for our rights and advocate for humane technology in order to
pressure technology companies into giving up their corrosive business practices. Hence,
the filmmakers effectively convey to viewers the importance of taking action to try to
change the system by drawing attention to the fact that the social dilemma is actually our
social dilemma.

7. What are some of the solutions for social media addiction mentioned during the
credits? Do you agree with them?

The last statement of the documentary encapsulates the solution that most experts
have provided: get out of the system, get off the stupid stuff. In this case, the word
"stupid" refers to excessive social media and technology usage. It is terrifying that the
system intended to create positivity and convenience has turned into a system we must
escape from due to the harmful effects it brings to the health and well-being of many.
After the documentary, the audience may wish to no longer reside in this strange world,
but we must come to accept that this strange world is ours and is a community we belong
to.

It is worth noting that we cannot simply eliminate something as existing and as

powerful as social media and technology; however, we need changes. It will take a long
journey to be able to do so, and our first step to solving social media addiction is to
recognize it as a problem. As the experts mentioned, it is difficult to battle the matrix if
you are inside it. The documentary serves as an opportunity to see outside the system and
to be guided with what we need to maintain control.

Battling social media addiction begins with the small things. As individuals, we
must be able to instill discipline in our usage of devices. This discipline is applied by
uninstalling applications that potentially waste our time, whether in social media or news,
since the information that must be known can be accessed through traditional media, such
as televisions and radios. Although slower in information transmission, traditional media
is more reliable than modern media. Reducing or eliminating unnecessary notifications or
anything that causes the phone's vibration in our pockets allows us to maintain our
attention span to more valuable aspects of our lives, such as family and relationships.

We must also acknowledge that we have rights and responsibilities as citizens of

the digital world, and our capabilities to choose among options should not be limited due
to the power of social media and technology. Some suggestions the experts gave were to
use Qwant, which does not store one’s search history, rather than Google. Search history
allows access to the user’s privacy and filters the search results in your engine. Following
the video recommendations on Youtube influences us to conform to the system even
more. Chrome extensions can be used to remove such recommendations and many others.
In fighting against this problem, we are also protecting ourselves and our mental health.
Fact-checking the information we receive from these various sources allows us to be
more cautious of our emotions’ limits. Taking that extra step to be able to dig deep into
truthful information keeps us responsible and healthy. Even in the applications and
software we use, we must be able to protect ourselves by choosing among our possible
options. It will take an extra effort to dig deeper into researching which of these offers
would benefit us holistically; however, it will be substantial for us to gain such
knowledge.

These solutions can affect and influence the actions of our surroundings and the
entire society. For example, every click may correspond to a vote and tons of money. It
massively influences various aspects of our society such as politics, religion, and the
environment. With numerous varying influences, we must ensure to achieve different
points of view and information to broaden our minds and understanding. From these
solutions and individual actions, they could grow to become a collective response to any
problem.

Our little actions can now be formed into a collective will. Using our solutions on
the small scale, we are now able to voice our opinions regarding the problem, change the
tide and conversations, and create massive public pressure to push people in power to
take action against social media addiction. As we have high hopes for such a miracle, we
also seek the help of our leaders to formulate laws and emphasize our rights as citizens.

We aim to provoke the system that leads an entire nation, as the government must
continue to present the matters that were missing and imperfect, such as ones in the
system itself or the usage of technology. Because of social media and technology, the
division of political beliefs has been more scattered. The government in itself has become
a threat to society; with the combined power of technology, they will become
 unstoppable. There must be at least a few leaders that are compassionate to be able to
fight for the safety of the rest of the digital citizens.

Not only does this keep the society we live in safer but it also opens a brighter
future for the next generations to come. The generation that is more responsible and
knowledgeable of how the world works must be able to teach the minority about the
limitations of the usage of social media and technology itself to protect them. By setting
rules, such as not having their own devices and social media access until an appropriate
age and decreasing screen time, parents must be particular with their children’s balance in
exposure to technology. Three simple rules, which included (1) all devices out of the
bedroom at a fixed time every night; (2) no social media until high school, and most
importantly, and (3) working out a time budget with your children and communicating
with them daily to get their inputs on what time is the best for them, which allows
openness and reasonable responses from these kids, maintain control of the current and
the next generation to this very powerful entity.

Certainly, with the power of social media and technology, it is difficult to instantly
get each individual to delete their social media accounts, but we must start small. It
creates a space to have at least enough people who are free of the manipulation engines to
have a societal conversation. Slowly but surely, the society we live in could see the issue
and how we must control our usage of these devices. The majority of the solutions
provided are promising given the willingness of each individual to take the extra step to
educate themselves regarding the issue and the discipline to be able to consistently
contribute in the battle.

Task Distribution: Please indicate each member’s contribution to the completion of the task.

GROUP MEMBER CONTRIBUTION

Katrina Pablo Question 1

Daphne Bernardo Question 2

Bryce Chan Question 3

Erin Mauricio Question 4

Kian Chua Question 5

Chiara Tan-Gatue Question 6

Breanna Liao Question 7