Introduction

The reality we live in is based on the circumstances around us and our opinions. This in turn is based on our experiences and the information we receive and process. About 100 years ago radio began its triumphal march. Until then newspapers were the only source of news. Thanks to the internet, news transmission has gained speed and reach. We have new technologies at our disposal for information transfer and networking. But this also means that we receive much more information than we can process. We try to keep an overview and are faced with the challenge of filtering content and separating the important from the unimportant. It is becoming increasingly difficult to read and check all information in detail.

In addition to renowned news sources, Internet services such as Twitter and social networks such as Facebook & Co. have established themselves as sources of information. Whereas it used to take days or weeks for news to spread, nowadays news can find its way around the globe within minutes via social networks. The information automatically comes to us, we are no longer forced to actively research and search for it. We live under the misconception that what is important will already reach us.

Social networks are now places where public opinion is formed. We divide and "share", mostly unreflected, in order to be part of it. In doing so, we overlook the fact that in social networks mostly only opinions are spread and that a discussion or even a constructive exchange of opinions only takes place to a limited extent. There is also an effect that social psychologists call "motivated reasoning". People actively seek information that confirms what they already believe, because this alleviates cognitive inconsistencies. By interacting in social networks mainly in groups that we trust, we create our own "echo chamber" in which our own opinion is supported and confirmed. The own opinion is always thrown back like an echo by the limited choice of messages, but other arguments no longer reach the user. Rumours or even false reports are thus difficult to stop or catch again.

Discussions and contributions in social media also suggest that a topic is important because there is a lot of talk about it, but in reality, it can be quite different. Is a video on YouTube that 10,000 people have seen more important or even more trustworthy than a video that has only 1,000 clicks? What does it mean when one grouping has 300,000 fans on Facebook and another only 150,000? The numbers do not speak for quality, but can be unconsciously manipulative.

Furthermore, we often forget that the information we are shown has already been selected for us. Our activities are stored wherever possible and evaluated by systems. A search engine optimises our search results based on our previous search queries. Social networks filter the content individually for each user to display messages that match our interests and opinions anyway in order to increase our interaction.

And these types of intelligent, automated systems have long been used to send messages and information to specific target groups. This can be individualised advertising or, in the worst case, the deliberate dissemination of false information ("fake news") in order to establish a certain opinion in the long term.

All this can lead to a conscious or unconscious manipulation of our perception. We must be aware that our view of the world is strongly dependent on these external circumstances. Therefore, we must be clear about the corresponding mechanisms, remain critical, and occasionally look beyond our own nose. In the following, we want to look at some methods and mechanisms that can sometimes influence our view of the world

Learning aims

Learning material