In his lecture, Jeremy Armstrong made an interesting connection between the Mediterranean sea and the internet. As someone spending a lot of time on the internet recently I thought it would be interesting to break down this comparison and ultimately see why this unfortunately is not fully accurate. Armstrong describes the Mediterranean as varied and diverse and as a constant medium for culture and information. On the surface this is a very appealing understanding of the internet; however, if we look deeper we are able to recognise that gatekeeping and echo-chambers are virtually inescapable online. Armstrong told us that you could not stop people from moving across the Mediterranean and that this was what gave it it’s unique power; however, I believe that information is being constantly manipulated and directed through the internet, making it ultimately very different.
The most fundamental difference between the internet and the Mediterranean is the targeted nature of the content we are exposed to on the internet. In ancient Greece, it was highly unlikely the sea would know you wanted a specific type of vase and direct this right to your port, yet everyday we see products advertised to us which seem to be tailored to our interests. This practice of monitoring of our internet behaviour for advertising is known as ‘Online Behavioural Advertising,’ and is becoming so frequent on the internet that it’s unlikely we will be able to escape it going into the future¹. Similarly to advertising, the content and resultant ideas which we are exposed to on the internet are almost always a reflection of our own ideas, due to both our ability to choose the forums we enter, and also the nature of website algorithms to target us with information they think we will want to engage with. I’ll use the example of the youtube algorithm although I’m sure we can all think of a range of relevant examples from our daily life.
A visual representation of the youtube algorithm. (Paul Covington, Jay Adams, Emre Sargin, “Deep Neural Networks for YouTube Recommendations.”)
Briefly, the youtube algorithm works through the system pictured; by narrowing down millions of videos into just dozens which are determined by information gathered about the user². This is ultimately very concerning for the free flow of information which we would hope to get from our explorations of the internet. However, if we express any partisanship online we will automatically only be exposed to this set of ideas, as this is what the algorithm thinks we want. This results in our viewpoints becoming narrower and less open to alternative ideas. Armstrong made a comment which I see to be relevant to this: “the more positively you feel about the people inside your group, the more negatively you tend to feel about those outside your group.” With our websites becoming more like echo-chambers, showing us only related content, it is frighteningly easy to fall into a group mentality and demonise those of different groups and ideas, a process known as the “radicalisation pipeline” in more extreme situations³. Perhaps if the internet were more like the Mediterranean and provided a constant exposure to new ideas and cultures, we could prevent the formation of such disconnected groups. However, unfortunately, the internet is less like the Mediterranean and more like a very specific waterfall.
1: Sophie C. Boerman, et al. “Online Behavioral Advertising: A Literature Review and Research Agenda”
2: Paul Covington, Jay Adams, Emre Sargin, “Deep Neural Networks for YouTube Recommendations.”
3: Manoel Horta Ribeiro, et al. “Auditing Radicalization Pathways on YouTube.”
Featured image: https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/podcast/networks-ancient-mediterranean/
I too thought the comparison was interesting: I almost wrote a blog post about it. Even more interesting has been reading your take, which would have been very different to anything I would have written. You focus on the internet and culture, whereas I thought the Mediterranean was comparable in terms of the air travel we have in the internet age. You can fly anywhere in a few million eyeblinks, and bring almost any trade good. Like with the internet however, there are now restrictions on exactly who and what can enter a country. Now more than ever.
This is such a well-researched and fascinating post!
I’m really glad you went further into this comparison as it’s certainly an astounding one. You go over some really important points here; particularly, I feel, the emphasis on the pervasiveness (and I suppose inescapability of the internet?) but also how much of it is shaped to fit us.
In a space like the Mediterranean, although people were unable to evade it, they had a significant greater deal of autonomy. More importantly, even if they felt they didn’t, they were aware of it. On the internet we lack many freedoms – psychological manipulation through advertising and the numerous algorithms you mention all restrict us. We only see one side of the internet; the side created for us. The issue is that much of these algorithms are hidden from us, or companies choose to release their aspects selectively. So although we know we’re being manipulated, a lot of the specifics of this, and the extent to which, we’re still unaware of. I wonder if this makes the internet even more dangerous – its ability to hide its actual power, I suppose.
This is just something your post got me thinking about – it was lovely to read, and your discussion of the echo chambers was incredibly enlightening, thank you!!!
This is such an interesting blog post! I am so glad you delved more into this metaphor as I found it fascinating when Jeremy mentioned it in the lecture. Your thoughts on the selective delivery of information through the internet is certainly a significant difference between it and the Mediterranean. I found your comments on the echo-chamber-like quality of this delivery eye-opening, particularly as the psychological implications can be so significant. As our words and ideas are often echoed back at us through what we view online, it is crucial we recognise that these ideas are not necessarily the whole story. Just as history can be portrayed through the lens of different narrators, it is important that we recognise the impact of perspectives on what we read online in a contemporary context. Thank you so much for this important reminder!