In exploring the intersections of technology, content, and AI, there were three texts that we dove into; Kate Eichhorn’s “A Brief History of Content in a Digital Era,” Cory Doctorow’s “Network Effects vs. Switching Costs,” and Kate Crawford’s Atlas of AI. Each piece dissects the ways technology reshapes our relationship with information and power.
Eichhorn delves into how the concept of content has dramatically evolved in the digital landscape. Content is no longer just about art, literature, or journalism— it’s commodified, broken down into bite-sized, shareable pieces that circulate across platforms. It is everything and nothing. Eichhorn argues that this shift has fundamentally changed how we engage with information, moving from deep, meaningful interaction to surface-level consumption. With her example of the Instagram egg, she shows that content isn’t about a message; it’s about keeping the system alive, constantly producing and circulating to fuel digital economies.
Doctorow expands on a different aspect of this shift: the architecture that locks us into particular digital platforms. He discusses how network effects—the idea that platforms become more valuable as more people use them—trap us within these ecosystems. This is compounded by “switching costs,” which are the barriers we face when trying to leave one platform for another. Doctorow’s argument brings attention to the power dynamics at play: we often feel stuck in platforms like Facebook, Instagram, or YouTube, not because we love them, but because leaving would mean losing our connections, content, or audiences. In a way, the platforms become less about enhancing creativity or communication and more about creating dependence.
Crawford takes a broader view, looking at the material and social implications of artificial intelligence. Crawford digs into the often-invisible labor, environmental toll, and power structures that make AI possible, revealing that AI is not just a technological marvel, but a system embedded in and perpetuating inequalities. Her work shows that AI doesn’t exist in a vacuum—it draws from vast amounts of data, much of which is scraped from human content, raising ethical questions about consent and ownership. AI, Crawford argues, is built on the backs of those who contribute data, often unknowingly, and it reflects the biases of those who control it.
Together, these works point to a disturbing trend in the digital era: the centralization of power. Whether it’s through commodified content, platform entrapment, or AI exploitation, the digital world is increasingly shaped by forces that prioritize profit over creativity, connection, or fairness. As consumers, creators, and contributors, we are part of these systems, but we are also often subject to their control.
That then leads to the challenge: finding ways to resist or navigate these forces, whether that means being mindful of the content we consume and produce, pushing for greater transparency and ethics in AI, or advocating for more user-friendly, open digital platforms. These readings remind us that the digital world is not neutral—it’s shaped by choices, and those choices can be changed. Hopefully.
Comments
2 responses to “Crawford, Doctorow, and Eichhorn, Oh My!”
What a great way of combining all of these pieces. You are very right about the centralization of power and the fact that we both control, and are controlled. We are just as flowing and changing as the internet we are using. My question is, how do you make change happen? Boycotting? If so, who decides which apps or platforms are boycotted? Reform? Is reform possible? Why or why not? And what about time. Many have grown accustomed and attached (those who benefit) to the way things are now, so reform will take time. Is there a way to speed it up? These are all big questions that I feel need to be answered as we talk about AI and the internet and the changes that need to be made.
The message about the Instagram Egg does show us how content can circulate and now many industries have taken advantage of that, wanting their content to simply become widespread regardless of what it is.
You’re so right about platforms making us become dependent. They’re all different places with different content we don’t want to miss out on. The way you put it, “we often feel stuck in platforms like Facebook, Instagram, or YouTube, not because we love them, but because leaving would mean losing our connections, content, or audiences,” was perfectly worded. We can’t quit them and it is disheartening to realize that our connections can make us dependent on platforms, sites, systems, etc. that don’t prioritize our interests.
The way AI relies on vast amounts of data and takes it without consent. AI might now exist in a vacuum but it consumes so much content that it is a vacuum. It is also shaped by inequalities and biases by those who create them. We create AI and control it, yet in the end it controls us as well.