corrcorr

Jan 7, 2021

5.0

This documentary thinks it's real cute. You may learn a thing or two, but a lot of the time it feels manipulative and self-righteous. I wish that, instead of portraying the mechanisms of ad-targeting as some kind of sci-fi super villain, they would have shown what truly goes on in the offices of google, facebook, and the like. The evils of manipulating human attention do not need to be sensationalized to look like something out of Tron or Blade Runner. Why not film the actual computer screens that are spitting back data about users of these platforms? Perhaps internet giants would not let cameras behind the scenes. Anyhow, this film has a noble goal but comes across as more dime-a-dozen infotainment that Netflix has pumped out many times before. Maybe if it did not treat its viewers as though they were brain dead I would have enjoyed it more. Show it to your tik tok friends who could lose a staring contest with a squirrel, as that is likely who this documentary is targeted for.

The Social Dilemma is a powerful documentary that explores how social media algorithms subtly manipulate user behavior, creating addiction and influencing mental health. Through expert interviews, dramatized simulations, and engaging visuals, it reveals the ethical dilemmas behind profit-driven platforms that often overlook their societal impact. With a balanced and accessible approach, the film encourages viewers to critically reassess their digital habits and understand the hidden forces shaping their online experiences. Read the full review here: (Indonesian version : alunauwie.com)

CinemaSerf

Jul 31, 2026

7.0

Every now and again I have arguments with my friends about my total lack of engagement with social media. I've never had any of them, and have cookies set to off on just about everything - I even trawl through the hundreds of vendors on Letterboxd and tell them what to do with their "legitimate interest", but after watching this I am begining to wonder if there is, indeed, any safe and comprehensive way to remain outside the ambit of Yankee tech and it's ever-present advertising and AI training models. What this attempts to showcase, albeit entirely one-sidedly, is just how these corporations have gone from being passive providers of services that augment life to giant ones complicit in formulating the actual direction of our lives. The suggestions from some plausible former industry figures like Tristram Harris are that we are increasingly the subject of wholesale manipulation and that for the most part are completely unaware. Using a bit of hit-or-miss slightly polarised family drama, it proposes that we are being electronically prodded and poked into behavioural patterns that are not only addictive but that are also seeing greater impact on the mental health of those spending five or six hours a day down their rabbit holes. Suicide rates are rising amongst age ranges that shouldn't even be able to spell the word, and the only scrutiny is coming from politicians who - as one Republican senator readily ackowledges - haven't much of a clue what they are supposed to be investigating. All against a backdrop of trillions of dollars but a dwindling number of actual jobs for the people whom this film claims are becoming less relevent to this entire creative process. What's also curious here is that so many of these developers are white, T-shirt and jeans wearing, perfectly manscaped men who in themsleves are just as symbolic as the pre-defined all-American product that their systems - admittedly now some years down the line - are churning out. There is little space for individuality anywhere here - unless we turn the tide. These folks saw a cause for optimism. Perhaps that's because they have little more clue than the politicians who could force a change, but so long as we are all opted in until we bother to opt out, then this ultimate conspiracy theory has an uncomfortable ring of inevitable truth to it. If computers are the equivalent of cycles for the brain, then I suppose AI must be their autopilot. What need for us, then?