Commentary: If we don’t shape the internet, others will

SINGAPORE: Some of us are old enough to remember when the internet was a space of boundless discovery, connection and knowledge-sharing.

Today, it is just as often a place of polarisation, performative outrage and misinformation. What went wrong? And more importantly - how do we fix it?

As technology theorist Marshall McLuhan observed: "We become what we behold. We shape our tools, and thereafter our tools shape us.” As we come to terms with how the internet has shaped us in the digital era, countries are enacting laws to address online harms, even considering following Australia’s lead in banning social media for minors.

Few think such bans will be effective in keeping children safe. And adults too are at risk of other online harms. The real question is: How can we create an internet that remains open yet safe, constructive and joyful?

Discussions on online harms often focus on the failings of platforms and their lackadaisical approach to user safety - and rightly so. But while platforms play a role, they alone cannot solve the problem, as underscored in the Online Safety Assessment Report released by the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) on Monday (Feb 17).

Neither can legislation alone, as it will always lag behind the rapid evolution of online threats. In just a few years, harmful online content has progressed from text and images to videos and now, deepfake technology.

So, even as laws are tightened and platforms forced into accountability, we the users must reflect on how we interact, what we share and how we hold ourselves accountable. Creating a safer, healthier internet is not just about minimising harm; it is also about actively shaping digital spaces to be more positive, respectful and meaningful.

EROSION OF DIGITAL TRUST

Every time I log onto X (formerly Twitter), I find myself unable to escape its owner Elon Musk’s political musings - no matter where I am in the world. Many suspect that his tweets are prioritised by the platform’s algorithm to appear prominently, regardless of users’ actual content preferences.

I left the platform that was increasingly driven by outrage-fuelled content rather than genuine discourse.

As Google’s former design ethicist Tristan Harris aptly put it: “If you’re not paying for the product, you are the product.” Today, digital platforms do not just reflect our interests - the algorithms shape them, often favouring division and controversy over meaningful engagement.

But algorithms alone do not dictate negative online culture. User engagement also plays a role.

When controversy and misinformation dominate, digital trust is eroded and with it, the quality of discourse itself. It is the tragedy of the commons: When individuals overexploit shared resources until they are depleted, it ultimately harms everyone.

Digital trust, as defined by the World Economic Forum, refers to expectation that digital technologies and services - and the organisations providing them - will protect all stakeholders’ interests and uphold societal expectations and values. Digital trust is not just a theoretical concept - it underpins regulatory frameworks, content moderation policies and user engagement strategies.

Just as social capital is fundamental to cohesive societies, digital trust is essential for fostering collaboration and accountability online. When trust is eroded, users disengage, further degrading the quality of digital spaces. If this goes unchecked, we lose more than just trust - we lose the ability to engage meaningfully.

WHAT IT MEANS TO HAVE EMPATHY IN THE DIGITAL ERA

One of the most urgent changes needed in our digital spaces is the cultivation of digital empathy.

When I was first learning to use an IBM PC XT in the 1990s, “netiquette” was part of basic digital literacy. The rules of online courtesy included avoiding writing in all caps, considering tone, and thinking before posting.

Early internet users emphasised thoughtful communication and the principle of “do no harm”. Today’s digital environment could benefit from revisiting these principles.

Studies show that online anonymity, the lack of nonverbal cues, and the absence of the emotional context of face-to-face communication, make misunderstandings and conflicts more likely. A digital culture built on empathy fosters positive connections and enhances collective well-being.

For example, when encountering cyberbullying, misinformation or harmful behaviour, we can choose to speak up and report it - while also offering encouragement to those targeted - rather than resorting to personal attacks.

The IMDA report also documented that while platforms have implemented reporting tools, many reports go unaddressed for too long, leaving users feeling helpless. Platforms must improve their responsiveness, but users also have a role to play in fostering a responsible reporting culture.

Instead of resorting to digital vigilantism and doxxing, users can report harmful content through appropriate platform tools and legal avenues. Advocating for greater transparency in content moderation is essential, but we must also ensure that online actions remain fair and ethical, resisting the urge to participate in digital pile-ons.

DOES THIS CONTENT SPARK JOY?

Just as a cluttered home breeds stress, an overcrowded digital space undermines mental well-being. Research has consistently linked excessive screen time and social comparison with increased anxiety, stress and reduced productivity, particularly among youth.

Instead of passively consuming whatever appears in our feeds, we should curate our digital spaces with intention. Inspired by Marie Kondo’s philosophy, we might ask: Does this content spark joy, inform or add value? If not, why share it?

One of my personal resolutions this year was to spend less time on autoplayed content. I dedicated 30 minutes to adjusting my streaming app settings across different devices to disable autoplay. The result? A significant reduction in screen time, freeing me to spend more quality time with people who matter.

Doomscrolling and video binging are not inescapable habits.

We could all restart a healthier relationship with technology by setting screen time limits, fostering offline activities, and creating digital-free zones such as bedrooms or family spaces.

The internet is not beyond repair. Social media is not all bad. We need stronger content moderation policies, agile legislation, and a collective commitment to a more constructive online culture. But just as importantly, we, as users, must take ownership of our digital interactions.

Because if we don’t shape the internet, others will - and not always for the better.

Dr Chew Han Ei is adjunct senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, National University of Singapore, and a board member of SG Her Empowerment.