Counterfeits in the Marketplace of Ideas

It might seem like the re-election of an insurrectionist has subverted the relevancy of books like Invisible Rulers. Really, though, I think it’s even more vital to understand how we’ve been (and are being) collectively manipulated. That’s what I was looking for, anyway.

Social media has earned a ton of attention from academia, industry, and society at large over the past 20 years. As you’ve probably experienced, discussing it succinctly requires a good deal of jargon¹. From specific concepts like “The Discourse” to more loosely-(re)defined ideas like “community,” author Renée DiResta adopts popular terminology pretty uncritically. This gives her writing an authentic quality, but it also misses the opportunity to explore how language reveals thought. Some of my criticism on this point is just a pet peeve (the hopelessly-cynical re-imagining of the term “content” comes to mind), but some of it seems logically inconsistent. In particular, campaigns to artificially inflate the representation of one side of a narrative (described here as manipulating the “share of the voice”) directly undermine the concept of “The Discourse.” Invisible Rulers doesn’t recognize any tension in its simultaneous use of the two terms.

DiResta spends a lot of time on topics which ought to be familiar to folks who have been even a little critical in their use of social media. It never hurts to hammer on important concepts; it’s just that the pacing takes a hit when, for example, you are reminded 2/3rd of the way through that, “some people online […] have the power to shape perception and make rumors go viral, with an assist from the niche crows who trust and often agree with them.”

I can’t be too critical, though, because we all stand to learn from thoughtful explorations of familiar ideas. Case in point: DiResta’s expansive definition of “influencer” got me thinking in terms of some of the writers who I turn to regularly. Reflecting on my aversion to the term has made me (I hope) ever so slightly more sympathetic. That alone made the book worthwhile for me, but your mileage may vary.

There are plenty of reasons to read even if you’re not a judgey pedant, though! The section on the Internet Research Agency doesn’t just have an amazing title (“From Russia with Likes”); its exploration of the IRA’s impact is eminently more approachable than the well-known scholarship the topic. DiResta also has a way with anecdotes, taking years of extreme exposure to social media and putting it to good use by crafting relatable yet instructive stories. Her personal experience takes a front seat as she recounts how her organization found itself under the crosshairs of high-profile people acting in bad faith². This clearly informed one of the books’ most prescriptive sections (and another highlight): “Notes for the Targeted.”

When it comes to solutions, though, Invisible Rulers takes a pretty careful tact. DiResta recognizes that the tech needs tweaking, but she stresses that “the content itself reflects real opinions. Real demand.” It’s ultimately about personal responsibility, which I find convincing yet intractable. Who knows, though? Maybe given enough time with safer tools, people will slowly back away from the rapidly-converging precipices.