Will big data lead to Big Brother?

In Albert Einstein’s later years he used to say that considering the misuse of his research to invent the most lethal of weapons, he wished he had become a watchmaker. Had he lived today, he would have been quite content that his advances in physics were used more for the good of humanity, and that the atrocities of using nuclear weapons have not been repeated since the end of World War II.

Almost every generation faces a similar dilemma when advances in technology can be utilized for the good of humanity or to control and even destroy it. Our generation is grappling with the far-reaching implications of the information-technology revolution, and how it is changing our behavior and exposes us to manipulation. If in the past dangers had emerged from developing technologies that mainly threatened our physical well-being, now the main danger lies in playing with our minds and affecting our cognition. The phenomenon of big data, if not regulated, brings this menace to society to a new level.

Big Brother is watching us

It is a familiar experience for anyone using social media to be bombarded with advertisements that reflect previous searches on other commercial websites. Big Brother is watching us, collects information and targets us in hope of giving us the final push to make a purchase. Some may see it as a benign marketing tool, and others as a gross invasion of privacy. It is inescapable that whether it is governments or private ventures, information about behavior is constantly collected and monitored.

“Big data” was defined by the Oxford Dictionary as “extremely large data sets that may be analyzed computationally to reveal patterns, trends, and associations, especially relating to human behavior and interactions.” If knowledge is power, this type of data gives a relatively small group of people and organizations enormous power over billions of people, sneakily watching over our shoulders. Consequently efforts by commercial and political bodies to change individuals and groups’ behavior is moving from persuasion to potentially manipulation.

Two of the most momentous events of the last year, Brexit and the election of Donald Trump as US president, are argued to have been manipulated by exploiting access to big data. In a recent column on NBC’s website, Chuck Todd and Carrie Dann asserted that “big data revolutionized the way American politicians win elections. In the process, it broke American politics.” Similarly it surfaced that both the Brexit and Trump campaigns used this type of information from a US-based company called Cambridge Analytica that unashamedly claims on its website that it collects information on over 200 million Americans. They offer their customers, using their enormous cache of information, the ability to “match your data to our database… and utilize our proprietary psychographic and behavioral profiling to target people more effectively.”

Deeply divided societies

For politicians and electoral campaign strategists this is the bonanza they have always been after, especially as surveys based on relatively small samples fail to yield accurate results — all the more so in paralyzed and deeply divided societies. As Todd and Dann rightly claim, political campaigns can use big data to target mainly their base support and ensure that they maintain their support. By collecting information about many aspects of voters’ behavior including what they read, watch, have an interest in, shop for and who they communicate with, individuals can easily be identified and pinpointed for tailor-made propaganda. As we increasingly witness, the electorate is fed with the type of information that suits the purpose of those who provide it in election campaigns — even if it is inaccurate or utterly fake.

In polarized societies that in turn become politically paralyzed, this exploitation and manipulation of big data consolidate the support base and considerably improve the chances of winning elections. Nevertheless, it exacerbates both the polarization and the paralysis. Campaigning should be the celebration of pluralism and the art of persuading voters of the merits of competing ideologies and policies. The use of big data replaces debate in society with marketing efficiency. It is about mobilization rather than engagement and debate. Inevitably this narrows the social and political debate to no more than a commercial interaction which is result-oriented.

For many centuries the ability of societies to reflect and improve relied on honest, sometimes painful, disagreements and dialogue. It has not always prevented failure and even cataclysmic results, and is not always based on complete transparency and accuracy. Yet there was enough of it to generate new ideas and to improve the human condition including the way it is governed. Big data passes much of it onto technology and empties frank and honest debate about the nature and future of our societies into the hands of the merchants bent on the winning of elections. It might be the case that the horse of big-data collection has already bolted, but in this case it has to be closely regulated and completely transparent. If the best that this technology could bring is Brexit and Trump, based on half-truths and lies, we should be afraid — very afraid.

• Yossi Mekelberg is professor of international relations at Regent’s University London, where he is head of the International Relations and Social Sciences Program. He is also an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House. He is a regular contributor to the international written and electronic media.