Are we doomed by the technologies we rely on, or can we use these digital tools to create a democratic Internet and reclaim the public sphere?

Tufekci: How social media took us from Tahrir Square to Donald Trump

Applebaum & Pomerantsev: How to Put Out Democracy's Dumpster Fire

Tang: Digital Social Innovation to Empower Democracy

DiResta: The Supply of Disinformation Will Soon Be Infinite

Aral: Don't Blame Bots, Fake News is Spread by Humans

new technologies makes it harder for traditional information gatekeepers to stifle or control dissident speech.

dissidents used digital tools to challenge government after government

Power learns, and powerful tools always fall into its hands.

digital technologies have shifted from tools of freedom to being blamed for upheavals in Western democracies.

voter profiling and microtargeting

New technology creates "persona account" on the Internet spreading disinformation distracting the public

algorithms designed to maximize revenue by keeping people glued to screens

microtargeting, especially on Facebook, could be used to wreak havoc with the public sphere.

The improvement of technology makes people difficult to distinguish the passage written by human and by machine

microtargeting tailors messages feed to users' desire and vulnerabilities

Technologies make it cheap to make up fake information, but make it hard to find out the truth

dispersed existing physically near communities, group people with similar ideas

post things quickly, undetectably, cheaply, and untraceably

shifted from public politics to a private, scattered one

Fake news about election greatly affect economy and democracy.

political campaigns, Russian trolls. etc. can use this characteristic to control the public, fanned the flames of division, fuel polarization

Bots spread about same amount of true information and false information on the Internet.

public sphere became too noisy and confusing for dissidents to have an impact

People is the one who decide to believe the Information on the Internet or not.

old gatekeepers like news paper blocked some truth and dissent, but they blocked many forms of misinformation too. New gatekeepers succeed by fueling mistrust and doubt, as long as the clicks keep coming

Fake journalist personas with plagiarized portfolios and stolen photos

reading opposite ideas online is like hearing from the opposing team in a football stadium, social echo chamber, belonging is stronger than facts

Whatever Russian may have done, domestic actors in the US and Western Europe have much bigger participants in using digital platforms to spread viral misinformation. The way forward is to figure out how our things function, the responsibility is on us.

American democracy was successful because they worked together, they united, but social media changed that

New technology, like generative adversarial networks, will make the Internet environment even worse.

Video of Jordan Peele and President Barack Obama

Instead of participating in civic organizations, Americans join internet mobs, submerged in the logic of the crowd, clicking Like or Share and then move on

conversation in this new public sphere is governed by rules set by a few for-profit companies.

democracy is becoming impossible, one half of the country can't hear the other

everyone withdrawn apart, the reason why democracy failed in France

Facebook have shown that they can edit the ranking system to create a purportedly "nicer news feed"

The current design of the internet makes it easier than ever to target vulnerable audiences with propaganda, and gives conspiracy thinking more prominence

Before private commercial platforms definitively took over, online public-interest projects briefly flourished, we know it is possible

Reconstruct the public sphere by making an ideal social media for democracy

not a place to show off and parade identities, but a place for people to argue about specific problems, forums, like in a townhall.

delay posting to reduce things said in anger.

require to proof physical existence, make sure users are real people

Polis has no "reply" function, and so no trolling or personal attacks

For people to engage, politicians need to cede real power

It is possible and people are eager for alternative, and they want to help invent them

radical transparency

can visit Digital Minister's office through internet

ask given our different positions is there some common values after all that everyone can live with? And given the common values, can we come up with innovations that delivers this values to everybody?

Taiwan use the sandbox system, make forked version of regulation, try innovator's ideas

Run online AI-moderated public consultation using Polis, the software itself is open sources, and the consultation is open data

Ask everybody for data, both citizen and government, everybody can contribute a factual data, others can reflect on it in a period of time

Can see clearly that most people agree with most of their neighbors

social innovations that is a picture of the people's consensus

Taiwan use digital tools to assist democracy

govzero, interactive, open-source websites that delivers a forked version of the public service, anyone can edit it

presidential hackathon, implement the winners' ideas as public service

through open innovation, make sure that the nation delivered things to the betterment of everybody.

disagree

agree, people is responsible

agree

agree

agree

agree, need real people

agree, algorithms group people

agree, give people the power

disagree

agree

disagree, not all

disagree, contradict

agree, tech is used for affecting thoughts

we have to figure out how to trust