I was asked to respond to some questions about the changing role of technology, artificial intelligence and social media for a panel.
- How do you think AI as a whole could transform our lives and how we solve social problems together?
There will always be the benefits of new technology – the hammer, the wheel, the printing press, telephone, computer, and now artificial intelligence. For the moment I prefer to call AI accumulated information as it does not meet the standard definition of intelligence. Intelligence is about understanding and making judgements based on reason. AI cannot do that. It can connect dots of information it has scraped from millions of sources and use language that sounds intelligent but it is dependent on human programming so far.
How can it transform our lives? The same way any tool increases our capacity to accomplish a task and at the same time increase the risk of misuse. People are injured or killed with basic tools like hammers and chisels, run over by wheels, lured into pornography by printed materials, harassed by telephone calls and addicted to dysfunctional behavior through social media. There is no doubt it will transform the way we accomplish tasks but it, perhaps more than any other tool we have invented, opens up the endless potential of misinformation, disinformation, deep fakes and lies so sophisticated they are impossible to detect. AI can sort through mountains of facts and combine them in helpful ways which could make working together easier by clearly defining the most obvious and researched places for cooperation. But it can also combine biased information that could lead to catastrophic decisions based on false or incomplete information. It can bring us closer together with better information or drive us further into our tribes with misuse and the destruction of trust.
- How are AI technology and expanding social platforms impacting human relationships and connections?
Social media platforms are a good example of the use and misuse of technology. Algorithms can prune and curate what we want to consume. That can eliminate all sorts of junk we don’t want to see. However, they can also put us into smaller silos and tribes that only reinforce what we already believe. It’s called “cognitive bias” because we are predisposed to valuing information that confirms what we already believe. Algorithms are not interested in expanding our horizons or challenging our predispositions. They are interested in defining and reinforcing our categories that will ultimately deliver us and our information to advertisers and paying sponsors. We and our profiles and preferences are the product every social platform is paid to deliver. As you might know, Reddit went public this month and the biggest concern is that they will not figure out how to monetize the enormous traffic they receive. Traffic is meaningless if it does not deliver us to an advertiser.
So, how does a technology whose ultimate goal is to deliver your information to an advertiser think about relationships? How does it hope to shape relationships that encourage us to be confronted endlessly with opportunities to buy more? It is constantly looking for patterns in our behavior that will help it serve up not only what we like but what will make us more likely to purchase a product or service, rally to a cause, vote for a candidate or bond us even closer to others like us while making us distrust those who are not. Social media is not as much about discussion as it is performative and creating a personal brand while delivering our information and preferences to advertisers and producers of products and services. Unless it does that the whole business model of social media would collapse.
Each platform serves a different purpose:
– Facebook is commonly used to connect with family and friends, share personal updates, and maintain a sense of community.
– Twitter/X is more focused on following news, politics, and current events.
– Instagram is primarily used for visual storytelling and sharing photos/videos with friends.
– TikTok is often used for entertainment and discovering new content.
– YouTube is seen as a platform for entertainment and learning through video content
But each of them are in the business of delivering us and our information to advertisers.
- How will AI disrupt the way people engage in nonprofit work?
I like the way Clayton Christensen defines disruption. It is not so much stirring up as it is providing something at a lower cost but with enough quality to be good enough. “Disruptive Innovation describes a process by which a product or service initially takes root in simple applications at the bottom of a market—typically by being less expensive and more accessible—and then relentlessly moves upmarket, eventually displacing established competitors.” In other words, people will be able to find non-profits that deliver a product or service that is less expensive and more accessible for any cause to which they are drawn. Which is the cheapest provider of anti-trafficking organizations at a reasonable level of quality? Which does evangelism for less than the premium brand? Which is most likely to have a significant impact on homelessness for the least amount of money? People have a wide array of choices now but information that can be customized is only going to increase exponentially.
By the way, the large church tends to be the most expensive provider of any service. That is why parachurch groups like Young Life, Samaritan’s Purse, World Vision, FCA and thousands of others were formed initially. They could focus on one thing at a time. Churches are going to have to consider the effects of disruption in their markets eventually. What will “good enough” mean for the church? Who will be the low cost provider?
- What are some foundational things you don’t see changing anytime soon when it comes to how people engage in philanthropy?
I suspect personal relationships and trust will always be primary values in the work of donors and non-profits. Yes, there are many people who give small amounts of money regularly to non-profits without any engagement and that, like voluntarism, is a basic part of the American culture. That could change as people lose trust in organized charities and are confronted more and more with scandals among non-profits. Once trust is gone the game is over. As well, it is a fact that people who volunteer are more likely to be donors to organizations than those who don’t and voluntarism is declining for a number of reasons. Where did most of us learn to give? Studies show that for many of us our first experience with giving and volunteering is in the church and for the last decade or so there has been a de-emphasis on giving to avoid offending a visitor or seeker. As overall attendance and public giving decline there are virtually no other places where children will be encouraged to make a habit of giving.
Philanthropy is not hard-wired into human beings. It is part of a created culture of our having a sense of being responsible for other people. As long as charities and churches can prove their value in helping people do that they will be supported.
Finally, there will always be the attraction of recognition, impact and social standing for major donors. The larger the gift the more likely these are the motivations,
- What is your assessment of the generational transfer of wealth?
I don’t think it will affect most non-profits as the concentration of the transfer is going to be in the top 10% of those already holding the wealth of real estate, family business and investment assets in the country. There is not going to be much of a trickle down as the wealth will still be concentrated in those individuals and families. In fact, some research indicates that the wealth gap will actually increase as a result of the transfer as inheritors tend to be more risk-averse than those that created the wealth. Yes, there will major planned giving contributions to universities, medical research, public and private foundations and large organizations who typically receive the bulk of bequests but I don’t believe the ordinary non-profit will be receiving much benefit from the transfer of wealth. It’s interesting that the bulk of the money committed to the Giving Pledge started by Bill Gates and Warren Buffet is going to private foundations and not charitable organizations.
- What would you say to leaders steering the boat right now at an organization facing changes in funding, employee turnover, and board leadership?
“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service to their country (organization); but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny (hard times), like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have the consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value.” Thomas Paine
“The middle of every successful project looks like a disaster” Rosabeth Moss Kanter
“Concentration is the key to economic results. Economic results require that managers concentrate their efforts on the smallest number of activities that will produce the largest amount of revenue…No other principle is violated as constantly today as the basic principle of concentration…Our motto seems to be: let’s do a little bit of everything.” Peter Drucker
“When the horse is dead, dismount.”