Pulling the strings: Is our relationship with algorithms evolving?

x Sponsored content on Research Live and in Impact magazine is editorially independent.
Find out more about advertising and sponsorship.

Earlier this year, a BBC journalist wrote a report about how Netflix and Spotify seemed to ‘know’ she was bisexual before she herself did, when she reflected on the suggested recommendations she had received.

It exemplified how algorithms have become an intrinsic, increasingly personal part of contemporary online life, reading signals such as search history to serve us content, recommendations and advertising.

While they have a clear commercial imperative, algorithmic recommendations have democratised popular culture to an extent. Whereas 30 years ago, magazine reviews or the Official Charts might have been the only ways to discover new music, Spotify today offers a plethora of playlists tailored to individual tastes.

On the other hand, algorithms can also be a blunt tool, grouping people by obvious demographics and reinforcing stereotypes – leaving us feeling annoyed at being targeted with unsolicited weight-loss content in January, for example.

With increased awareness of algorithms in our lives, there is a shift towards reassessing the role they play – and in some cases, people are changing how they interact with platforms, to change the dynamic.

For example, reports of dating app users ‘hacking’ the settings highlight a desire to reclaim agency over the types of potential love interests being suggested.

“The whole idea of a dating app is that you have more choice and control over who you meet, and the algorithm has taken that control away,” says Katrina Russell, associate director at semiotics agency Sign Salad.

Other examples include adjusting Instagram’s settings to change what advertisements appear, or actively ‘liking’ certain content to see more of it.

Russell thinks there is a wider trend for hacking algorithms, but says it’s not about people turning away from them – but working out ways in which they can have more choice.

“Finding a creative way to gain more control is an appealing concept. Given the prominence of a lot of big players in tech, people are looking to find their own power and control,” adds Russell.

The take-up of algorithm-free social platforms such as micro-blogging site Mastodon and RTRO (which pitches itself as ‘non-toxic social media’), hint at this desire for control – as well as a rejection of big tech’s hold over what some see as the ‘public square’.

The original forms of social media tried to create ‘a more horizontal space’, says Russell, but that has now changed. “That feeling of even-handed representation has, for many people, been distorted by algorithms. It’s not so much that the problem is the algorithm itself, but rather the specific algorithm that is being used by each platform.”

Russell adds: “The ultimate idea of the algorithm is to keep a seamless flow of cultural content and to reflect people, rather than make people feel that they can see the demographic bucket that they have been put into – which, for a lot of people, is not appealing.”

The impact of algorithms extends far beyond recommending products, and ‘switching off’ isn’t easy in modern life. Some young people have reported using TikTok, for example, to effectively self-diagnose health conditions after being served with highly individualised content.

With social media apps having such immersive layouts, it can be hard to separate your own motivations and preferences from what you are seeing.

Russell says: “There is a real challenge around being able to ignore, or to not identify, with what’s being said to you – it’s literally called a feed.”

Cultural currency

While evidence is scant on this emerging topic, studies of how young people engage with algorithms offer an insight.

For the most recent edition of its Almanac publication, which came out earlier in 2023, US youth culture agency Archrival fielded research looking into algorithms, with a focus on Generation Z – a group of people that has never known a world without them.

Half of participants agreed that ‘their algorithm’ knows their tastes and preferences better than their parents do, and 44% agreed that ‘my algorithm rarely surprises me’. Another half say they have ‘trained’ algorithms to show them more specific content or products – for example, by actively engaging with certain pages.

Bayla Metzger, senior editor at Archrival, says: “This generation has their finger on the cultural pulse, but they also find the cultural ecosystem overwhelming. So, they try to navigate overwhelm but they also know algorithms can help them with that – making things more personalised and customised to their taste and interests.

“However, there are negative sides that they are aware of: it can keep them in a taste bubble that’s of their own making.”

FOMO (fear of missing out) plays a role, says Alex Gordon, chief executive at Sign Salad. “There is a pivot between wanting access and receiving information that you want – FOMO is a major concern – versus the desire to control, and be able to curate, what is available to you. There is a fear of both missing out and not having control.” This trade-off is at the centre of a current cultural moment, with younger demographics in particular wanting to maintain cultural currency while simultaneously understanding they are ‘subject to the whims of an algorithm’, adds Gordon. “We haven’t quite reached that point where we want to let go wholly of content or have a much more managed curation of the content we receive,” he says.

Gordon predicts tools such as cookie management will become less cumbersome in future, making it easier to curate things ourselves. But it’s unlikely that people will reject algorithms completely.

Says Metzger: “We also hear that social media and algorithms are a necessity. In a lot of ways, Gen Zs have made peace with the fact that this is the world they live in.”

Alternative inspirations

• Self-publishing platform Substack hit more than two million paid subscribers in 2023. It connects writers directly with readers and eschews algorithms and advertising.
• Archrival qual found young people reporting that they were not going to Spotify to discover new music – instead visiting New York’s public parks to look for buskers. Another study by the company found that 53% of young people claim they prefer to discover new products in store, not through social media.
• The ‘Luddite Club’ is a group of teenagers that meets regularly in New York, putting away smartphones and promoting a lifestyle free of social media (the New York Times, December 2022 ).

This article was first published in Impact magazine in October 2023.