This essay examines the societal and psychological repercussions of technology and techniques commonly employed in digital media. It identifies the workings of human attention and its exploitation...Show moreThis essay examines the societal and psychological repercussions of technology and techniques commonly employed in digital media. It identifies the workings of human attention and its exploitation as a major gateway for external influence to undermine the authoritative and intentional use of digital media. The ability to attract human attention is central to the business models of the largest digital companies today. By attracting and redirecting human attention towards advertisement, collecting valuable data in the process, companies like Alphabet, Amazon or Facebook turn major parts of their profits. It is proposed that the capability to attract human attention as a resource is best approached by understanding it as a form of capital in the tradition of Pierre Bourdieu. It, therefore, differentiates between incorporated, institutionalized and objectified attention capital. Objectified attention capital is of special interest since it resembles the material means to attract attention, including the digital infrastructure, server farms, algorithms and social media platforms owned by large corporations. With this focus on attention, the interplay between the human mind and the technologies employed can be traced, revealing the structural undermining of human intention by technological and economic rationale. The reversal of the roles of consumer and media are then diagnosed, implying the exploitation of the consumer as an end to generate behavioral surplus data and profits, overruling the original intent of the consumer in the process. The effects of this reversal and subsequent loss of human control are then embedded in the works of Jürgen Habermas and his concept of colonization. It is demonstrated, how the functioning of objectified attention capital is colonizing ever new areas of everyday life, subsuming and assimilating it under its logic. Four major repercussions of this process are finally laid out: Firstly, the formalization and decline of public debate. Utilizing the Habermasian terminology of the public sphere (Habermas, 1962), detrimental effects of objectified attention capital on the public debate are identified including the fragmentation of knowledge, leading to ‘post-truth’ politics, as well as the commodification of public discourse that takes away its spontaneity and with it its emancipatory momentum. Secondly, this approach is extended and applied to the democratic process, where the amplification and encouragement of moral outrage on digital platforms by filter-mechanisms of objectified attention capital are demonstrated. Referencing the works of Jan-Werner Müller (2016) and James Williams (2018), the populist tendencies of the increasing moral outrage are traced. Thirdly, the biases in attentional big data are brought forth that discriminate against women and minorities, since the data sets employed in objectified attention capital are often skewed, reproducing one-sided world views. Finally, the loss of human attention is understood as a decrease in human autonomy, increasing the control of technology over the future of humanity. However, utilizing the analytical tool of attention capital, several areas where steps against this development can be undertaken are identified, focusing on the regulation of objectified attention capital and the democratizing potential of institutionalized and incorporated attention capital.Show less
