This article was definitely a summarization of what we have read, watched, and discussed over prior weeks. Now that it’s time to catergorize and break down each zone, I am able to summarize from a different lens.
Zone 1: Truth, Disinformation, and Propaganda
Social workers have the challenge of increasing threat from technology driven disinformation that can be confusing, harmful, and detrimental for the clients. Social workers have to remain vigilant and research information received and always confirm the source of the information. As we have mentioned, vulnerable groups can be all generations and not just the elderly. There would be a need for literacy and education of the information obtained from social media websites as the information and access continues to grow rapidly. An example of misinformation in social services can be the recent federal goverment shut down and the discontinuation of social service benefits, i.e. EBT, snap. There are clients who may not watch the news or read article with real and truthful information and become discouraged or misinformed. This also causes choas and an overflow of clients calling and coming into the office for information reported on social media sites. Meanwhile the positive aspect of social media could be the announcements from non-profit organizations, churchs, and community centers who are hosting food drives, essential needs, and possible monetary assistance during these challenging times. The main focus should be to provide literacy and ethical approaches to the use of social media (Broddy et. al 2017). It was the damn phones and The Social Dilemma can definitely provide several examples of propaganda, being misinformed, and the truth. There are of course reputable websites and information to seek the truth, hence the library providing material and academic journals online. However, the addiction to a fast paced video and receiving information at a great speed does not allow the time it truly takes to research.
Zone 2: Addiction and the Dopamine Economy – According to Bibbs, et.al (2023),By identifying the potential for addiction and increased distraction, this zone addresses the physiological and pyschological effects tech can have on well-being. This has been the talk with the use of phones and the algothriurm and how both can be addictive across all generations. As we have also discussed CHT mission and purpose to hold companies and individuals responsible for the ethical role of this addiction. Excessive social media use, distraction, and constant connectivity via cell phones can contribute to posing risks to client wellbeing and complicating, technology addiction, and challenging the coundaries of social workers. Social workers are challenged to assess technology’s influence in clients’ lives, recommend balanced use or necessary pauses, advocate for digital balance, and address technology-driven stress or dependency in both direct practice and policy settings (Broddy et. al 2017). These addictions are being monetized for economical gain. It was the damn phones and The Social Dilemma remains the same in this zone as well. There is a true addiction and it’s hard to truly recovery when we’re all relying on the digital gadgets and systems to conduct our personal, social, and professional lives.
Zone 3: Economic and Asset Inequalities
There are pros and cons to technology especially in relations to Social Work. With that said, technology can have positive and negative affects on the quality of life, significantly impact mental health, attention, and relationships. Excessive use of social media, cell phones, and AI can become a distraction, addiction and pose many risk on the client’s wellbeing. Social workers are challenged to assess technology’s influence in clients’ lives, recommend balanced use or necessary pauses, advocate for digital balance, and address technology-driven stress or dependency in both direct practice and policy settings. So do we access the dependency on technology, discuss boundaries, and implement some intervention measures. I talked about a “no phone zone” that I wouls suggest for a client, especially clients with children. Disengaging with technology during a certain time, i.e. dinner, car rides, 30-45 minutes prior to bedtime in order to have conversations and discussion or find an activity to have fun with one another. These tools can be used for individuals, couples, students, etc.
Zone 4: Machine Ethics and Algorithmic Biases
Social workers must ethically research the origins and training of the tech tools they use, check their differential impacts on diverse populations, and hold these systems accountable for transparency and equity. Because algorithms and artificial intelligence are trained on the data and biases of their designers, they can potentially misidentify, unfairly assess, or over-police specific populations. Maintaining client dignity and rights in technology guided interventions. Are these biases based on economics and the lack of resources? Which then would definitely increase the number of clients who are affected by these algorithmic biases and possible addictions to the information.
References:
Boddy, J.& Dominelli, L. (2017). Social media and social work: The chellenges of a new ethical space. Australian Social Work, 70(2), 172-184. https://doi.org/10.1080/0312407X.2016.1224907
Hi Kim!
I think your example of the recent federal government was spot on. I think it can be very challenging to point out misinformation, especially when people in the administration leading the government can often be the ones causing the misinformation. Like you, I have also been encouraged by the amount of people who have been willing to step up and help their neighbors amidst the shut down. It has almost been a relief to know that there are other people who also care.