The benefits of highly centralized sites are how easy it is to connect with others. More people do not have to hop on a phone call or text each other to catch up nowadays. Most of the time they’re able to log into whatever app or website and look at a users page to see what they have been up to. Which leads me to talk about convenience as well. The convenience of these sites are unmatched compared to how we used to gather information. It is easier to invite people to an event or network with someone for an opportunity. Even as simple as researching things and getting real feedback is a bonus. However, there are some drawbacks which would be creating a monopoly where one entity has full control over what their users are seeing. This could be harmful to new innovative ideas, opposing views, and overall freedom of speech. Becoming dependent on a centralized platform is not the greatest idea especially if you are using it to gather information or to stay connected with people. If the site went down indefinitely, you would have to find a new way to connect. So I would advise you to gather phone numbers and/or emails from those you care about. There’s also the concern of privacy. What ads are being shown and how are they targeting us? This discussion on Linkedin is great at identifying and choosing a centralized or decentralized approach. One person wrote about how well Google thrives in being a decentralized site. Giving users more than one perspective as a result.
I think it is important as I mentioned previously, to look for more decentralized environments. That way you have the ultimate decision for yourself because you are gathering so much information from so many different teams. It is an extra step to do the research, but I think it will make the autonomy of your decision making a lot more authentic. Since the U.S. is all about freedom, I think it is hard to tell how exactly the government should regulate centralized sites. Since you don’t want to necessarily ban a site just for someone pushing views or way of thinking. After all, it is their site. However, I think having that external portal for conversations could work so there is not a set bias being pushed to users without a second opinion. I think also having the idea of labeling upfront “this is a centralized site” would better inform users on questioning the things that they are seeing. This article by the New York Times (here) talks about how government intervention would only make things worse. Ultimately, I think who owns what we say to each other all depends on the platform we are using. If it is completely out of hand, then I believe that is where the government may fall in line. It is a tricky subject, but second guessing and knowing what your resources are can be helpful.