{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017757009345794394, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.735849056603773, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 2, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Democracy for Profit?

This chapter evaluates Facebook and Twitter’s algorithms using the framework of democratic space. Prominent critiques highlight their opacity and users’ lack of control; tools like Gobo “fix” these algorithms by increasing their flexibility. But while these solutions might cede more control to individual users, they are insufficient for building democratic communities; the more pressing concern for both Facebook and Twitter is their lack of clear boundaries, which undermines users’ ability to recognize their communities. The chapter concludes by showing how we might “democratize” these algorithms in ways that not only increase user control over their digital environments and the algorithms that structure them, but also help to generate and sustain the communities required to exert that control democratically. Ultimately, the chapter argues that questions of ownership and control must be placed alongside considerations about the communal effects of algorithmic design if we are to build environments supportive of democratic politics.