The speed at which technology has been developed over the last century has exponentially grown. This statement is probably the most evident in Moore’s Law which states that the number of transistors on a computer chip doubles every two years [1]. In fact, advancements in technology have always been present throughout the history of mankind.  However, is this influx of technology truly something that conveys the betterment of all mankind, or are there pitfalls that have yet to be discovered? One of these alleged pitfalls being debated is the question about whether society has become technology addicts.

Prior to the widespread availability of mobile computing that enabled the present technological ubiquity, technology was rather limited to where it could be taken. Computers were still rather large objects that could not easily be transported without significant effort, and cellular phones were rather basic devices whose primary, and potentially only, functionality was to make telephone calls. Even with technology being ever-present amongst people, technology was still limited in people’s lives. The introduction of devices such as the Blackberry device in the late 1990s and their niched use by business professionals [2] started to make it evident that the number of people using these devices could be construed to be considered a sign that a transition has begun where devices are being kept on a person. Furthermore, from a biased hindsight perspective, it is easy to point to the above-mentioned transition of people’s increased use of Blackberry devices as a sign that addiction could follow.

While there are many different forms of technology addiction, one of the most prevalent forms has emerged due to the boom of mobile computing and the ability of these devices to travel alongside people. A 2011 Pew Research Center report on “Generations and Their Gadgets,” discussed the prevalence of devices across all generations [3]. It should be noted that the data is from 2010 and the likelihood of the numbers shifting is quite high since the survey was completed nine years ago. It is also likely the existing trends will continue with the expectation that the new “18-34” year old age group continuing to have the highest percentages of adults with devices. It should also be stated that the first iPad was released in January 2010 [4]. Since then, the number of tablet users has reached billions worldwide [5]. The shifting of the age groups since 2011 can be supported by the “smartphone adoption among seniors has nearly quadrupled in the last five years” [6], which demonstrates a substantial increase in usage of devices amongst seniors.

However, such an accusation as stating that society is a technological addict, it is not sufficient enough to provide simple generational trends as evidence. Much research has gone into this understanding of technology addiction and what it means for society itself. In order to first gain such an understanding, a baseline should be set.  The Merridan-Webster dictionary defines an addiction as “a compulsive, chronic, physiological or psychological need for a habit-forming substance, behavior, or activity having harmful physical, psychological, or social effects and typically causing well-defined symptoms (such as anxiety, irritability, tremors, or nausea) upon withdrawal or abstinence” [7]. In order to put this definition into perspective, the average person checks their smartphone 47 times per day [8] with that accumulating to an average of 58 minutes per day spent on their smartphone [9].This leads to reaffirm the findings by Das et. al. that there does exist a correlation between the number of hours spent on a mobile phone and whether there is the possibility that the individual is addicted [10]. This prolonged exposure to mobile technology day in and day out does have its side effects as does anything that is being used inappropriately.  Some of the side effects that have been well-observed include, but are not limited to, stress, anxiety, and misuse [11, 12].  While the previous side effects were more focused on how the addiction affected the individual personally, technology addiction also has the ability to affect a person’s inner circle. This is especially true when it comes to conflicts between the individual and their family. One such hypothetical example of such a conflict could be derived from the continuity of work during the individual’s time at home. With the ease of access that devices now provide, performing tasks such as checking email or communicating through some kind of messenger are nearly effortless. However, this effortlessness from the individual can quickly shift into them becoming solely focused upon the device. If such a deviation of focus from the individual’s family to the various nuances within their employment were to continually reoccur over a course of time, the possibility exists that the seeds of discontent that could be sown until the conflict has grown into something much larger in the future [13].

What attributes to the challenge of having not just the individual, but the near entirety of society, face its addiction is simply the ubiquity of devices amongst those in society. In fact, there is a negative correlation that exists between a person’s age and several various types of technology addiction that inflict people [10]. The younger individuals who are becoming of age to be considered part of the previously mentioned demographic study have lived their entire cognitive lives in the presence of mobile technology [14]. In their eyes, this is how the world was meant to be and anything else is merely a history lesson that they are unable to personally relate to. With that said, the final age bracket of the demographic study will one day be comprised of this generation. At that point in time, will all of this still be considered a technological addiction or simply the present state of affairs for society?

In conclusion, society is gradually changing and integrating technology into each generations’ perceptive status quo. This was demonstrated by the data presented by Zickuhr which brought insight into the trends of device integration amongst the various generations. Once the scale of technology penetration was quantified, it became imperative to set a common understanding of what addiction was and what negative outcomes were being brought forth due to the addiction. This became exceptionally apparent with the age groups due to the negative correlation that existed between the younger and elder generations.

References

[1] Poeter, D. How Moore’s Law changed history (and your smartphone). PC Magazine, (April 19, 2015).

[2] Cassavoy, L. What is a Blackberry? Lifewire  December 23, 2018).

[3] Zickuhr, K.  Generations and their gadgets. Pew Research Center: Internet & Technology (February 3, 2011).

[4] Wikipedia. (2019, October 6). iPad (1st generation).

[5] Liu, S.  Forecast number of tablet users worldwide 2013-2021. Statista (July 22, 2019).

[6] Anderson, M., and Perrin, A. Tech adoption climbs among older adults. Retrieved from Pew Research Center: Internet & Technology (May 17, 2017).

[7] Merriam Webster. Addiction.

[8] Wolfe, A.  Guess how often you use your phone every day. Journal of Accountancy (April 2, 2018).

[9] Ballve, M.  How much time do we really spend on our smartphones every day?  Business Insider Australia (June 6, 2013).

[10] Das, A., Sharma, M., Thamilselvan, P., and Marimuthu, P.  Technology addiction among treatment seekers for psychological problems: Implication for screening in mental health setting. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine 39, 1 (2017), 21-27.

[11] Hou, Y., Xiong, D., Jiang, T., Song, L., and Wang, Q.  Social media addiction: Its impact, mediation, and intervention. CyberPsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Reseach on Cyberspace 13,1 (2019), 1-17.

[12] Tarafdar, M., Gupta, A., and Turel, O.  The dark side of information technology use. Info Systems Journal 13, 1(2013)., 269-275. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12015

[13] Turel, O., Serenko, A., and Bontis, N.  Blackberry addiction: Symptoms and outcomes. AMCIS (2008).

[14] Gerhart, N.  Technology addiction: How social network sites impact our lives. Informing Science: The International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline 20 (2017), 179-194.

Being born in the late ’70s, I did not grow up with a ton of technology around me. I learned how to communicate with others (although being an introvert this was most painful), make friends, play outside, find happiness in simple things; none of which required a lot of technical expertise, but that absolutely required collaborating with neighborhood kids or friends at school. Unlike today, technology was not all-absorbing.

I see my kids growing up with a ton of technology around them, and I wonder if technology has changed everything for the better. It is easier than ever for them to find answers for most of their questions. Unlike me, they don’t need to go to a library and sit there for hours to find the right book for the right answer. Pretty much everything, every answer, is a touch of a button away. It makes me wonder sometimes if they are too reliant on technology and not applying themselves (or working hard) to learn. Then there are times when my kids find too many answers for the same question and become confused about what the ‘right answer’ is. How is it that with so much information available so easily, we still are not always sure of the right answers? In a way, having too much information available at our disposal may confuse us and deter us from availing ourselves of the benefits of technology.

The development of smartphones and increasing reliance on them to connect with friends has ensured that social applications are right at the heart of this digital revolution. The popularity and accessibility of social media have grown leaps and bounds as the availability of smartphones and improved internet connectivity across the globe increased, including more and more people in the conversation. People can stay connected around the clock and be aware of events occurring live in distant parts of the world. Apps like WhatsApp, Snapchat, and Facebook Messenger have increased options for folks to instant message, view pictures and stay connected. People these days are creating family events and memories as they travel or hit major personal or professional milestones. These digital apps help distant relatives feel included in these moments by sharing experiences, photographs, and videos. However, there are limitations to digital communication. The lack of context and the asymmetrical nature of much digital communication can leave people wondering if their message was received the way it was intended.

Technology has revolutionized travel. Folks are no longer excluded from the experiences that the world has to offer. Access to technology has enabled folks with all sorts of budgets and interests to identify their travel destinations and have the confidence to undertake these trips. In the past, if I didn’t have sufficient knowledge about a destination I was interested in, I would typically skip the trip. Not anymore. Apps like google maps in combination with smartphones have not only made old tools like maps or even GPS devices redundant, they have enabled and empowered reluctant people who may not be comfortable to venture out to take impromptu road trips. Integration of these apps on mobile platforms has enabled the end-to-end experience from suggesting, to planning, to actually executing a travel plan. Technology has enabled folks to venture outside their comfort zone by seeking out their interests in a particular destination.

Technology has enabled quality education to reach more areas of the world than ever before. Without traveling to college, students can get quality education from the convenience of their homes. Many top colleges in the world have put educational content online, enabling the far reaches of the world to benefit from them. Technology has enabled the creation of expansive pools of data like Wikipedia that people from across the world collaborate on to keep relevant and up-to-date. More folks are becoming “DIYers” by logging on to YouTube and viewing how-to videos. Ultimately, today’s digital society is becoming self-sustaining. The more we leverage and contribute to the online content, the more expansive and detailed it becomes.

The digital revolution has tremendously helped the field of healthcare as well. From electronic health records that enable continuity in care, to having the ability to connect remotely with your healthcare provider; these are all technologies that are enabling access to quality healthcare. Furthermore, folks are now able to have a better understanding of their healthcare needs and make better decisions on how best to help themselves. People are able to review, monitor and understand the risks associated with their health using a multitude of apps and technology made available either by insurance companies, healthcare providers or tools available “off the shelf.”

Digital society has helped connect remote parts of the world and serve parts of society who were previously marginalized. While digital society has eliminated boundaries in many areas, it has made it easier to create silos based on a category like (and not limited to) age, interests, beliefs, which may exclude folks who don’t fit in them. Ultimately, this leads to controlling the flow of information to some, thus excluding others.

Digital society also has stringent norms about what tools and technology you must have in order to participate. Many folks may be left out if they don’t have the right smartphone or don’t subscribe to apps or don’t feel like providing personal information as requested. Digital society has become a double-edged sword, on one hand, information is freely available and on the other hand, enough personal information may be available to create a comprehensive profile of an individual.[JC9] It feels like you have very minimal control over the personal information that you have out there. While stereotypes have existed in the past, nowadays, someone can easily judge you based on what you post on social media without really knowing you. For example, I may have liked a message on a forum with some political overtones and someone who sees that may jump to conclusions about my political views more generally without understanding the context or taking the time to have a real conversation with me. I may be included or excluded based on what people think about me without really knowing me.

Imagine the results when this information is compromised and leads to stolen identity. The threat of someone stealing your identity has kept many people on the sidelines. There is also a generational aspect to exclusion. While millennials may be the most trusting and willing to adopt digital tools to be part of this online society, other generations have a change management curve to conquer. They are trying to catch-up with tools that didn’t exist before and technology that was at one time considered impossible. Sometimes they make a choice to not adapt and stay out; hence, excluding them. Many people still want and desire to interact with others in person and not via video or digital personas—they also opt-out.

Overall, digital society has its merits and pitfalls. It is ultimately up to each individual to decide how much they want to be part of this society. They can be ‘all-in’, ‘partially accepting’ or can choose to ‘stay out’. I must say, that the last choice may not be an option after all. While you may not have consciously created a digital footprint yourself, there may be enough information on you available to piece together your digital footprint. Something as trivial as posting ‘hold mail’ on usps.com is creating a footprint of you! The question may not be whether you want to be part of digital society, rather how much you want to be a part of it.

Technology touches every aspect of our life in this day and age, from the moment we wake up to the time we go to bed. It has become such an integral part of our life that even our homes are becoming smart homes. If we look around us, there is no part of our life where we do not use some form of technology. At this rate, we will not be the ones using technology anymore, rather technology will use us.

We are connected all of the time. Not only through smartphones, laptops, and PCs, but we use the internet in every machine possible thanks to the Internet of Things (IoT). Many cities are embracing the smart city initiative. In Rio de Janeiro predictive analytics has been integrated with cloud-based storage for massive sensor networks [1]. The city of San Jose is collaborating with Intel and South Korea’s Songdo has collaborated with Cisco in order to use IoT linked to city infrastructures to control the flow of traffic, decrease sound pollution, and improve the air quality [1].

It can be presumed that in the near future all that can be connected will be connected. Around 11 billion devices connect to the internet now and this number is projected to nearly triple to 30 billion by the year 2020, and then almost triple once more by 2025 [2]. By 2020 IoT is expected to become a $1.46 trillion market [2].

All of these smartphones, laptops, and other devices and products embedded with sensors, such as smart clothes and smart watches, are purported to improve the quality of our lives. Smart devices will amass thousands of analyses and readings in a short amount of time. Cars are going to be equipped with IoT. Smart homes and smart office will use IoT to make us more connected, secure and productive. But all of these technologies produce a massive volume of data. Some of these data are mundane, like the temperature of the conference room. But other data can be extremely sensitive, like the details of a new business deal. Supermarkets are already using data to predict their customers’ behavior. When a lot more data is available, unscrupulous business owners will be able to use data to render people useless without their products. This massive flood of data can be used to encroach upon privacy, and soon this might encroach on security too. A connected dishwasher can be used as a backdoor and sensitive information about the owner might be stolen by hackers. If the company producing the products is unethical, they can collect information without the knowledge of the user. Cyber-criminals will increase, and they will be able to bring down people or industries quite easily.

There is disagreement about how all of this data is or should be used. If it belongs to the governments, they might use it to create totalitarian societies. If it belongs to businesses, they can use these data commercially to sell more products. Already video game producers and social media owners have processed and used data to get users addicted to their products. Instead of going outside to meet friends, people invite friends from the comfort of their home in the virtual world to play games or spend all day looking at people’s social media news feed [3]. Our generation is already less social than previous generations [4]. People are increasingly becoming dependent on online shopping. Shoppers increasingly prefer automated self-service check-out [5]. At this rate, the future generation might not develop any social skills at all and will rely on technology for everything.

At the same time, some people are craving human interaction. So, now tech companies are trying to provide human interaction using AI. For instance, Wysa is an app that allows people to release stress and anxiety, and it is being called the “4 am friend.” There are many similar apps like Webot, Joyable, and Talkspace which aim to help people deal with mental health issues. So, it’s possible that we are looking at a future where it is normal to have computer applications or robots as friends or maybe even romantic partners [6].

An average American uses electronic media almost 6 hours per day [7]. The problem is, excessive use of mobile devices makes people more prone to depression and also increasingly impatient. Additionally, people’s memory can become impaired as information is stored in different devices [8]. Likewise, because of the use of GPS and other navigation devices, people are losing the ability to use maps or have never learned to read one [9]. It might become impossible for them to navigate without GPS devices. If autonomous cars become the norm, people will not learn to drive. So, for every single mundane task that we rely on technology to do for us, we become more dependent on technology.

It is not bad to use technology. Technology has raised the standard of living in many parts of the world and is projected to do more. While it may have become part and parcel of our day-to-day life, we should not be too reliant on technology. It is important to find balance. Most of the tech giants do not allow indiscriminate use of technology in their own homes, and they especially limit the use of technology when it comes to their children [10]. There must be a good reason for that.

There has been revolutionary growth in the field of technology in the last few decades. Technology is making our life so much easier, but we should not forget the potential risks. If we become too dependent, we might lose the power of critical thinking and innovative nature that helped us invent and design all these things in the first place.

References

[1] Jones, T., and Dewing, C., Future Agenda: Six Challenges for the Next Decade. Profile Books, 2016.
[2] M. Kanellos. 152,000 Smart devices every minute in 2025: IDC outlines the future of smart things. Forbes. (March 3, 2016); https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelkanellos/2016/03/03/152000-smart-devices-every-minute-in-2025-idc-outlines-the-future-of-smart-things/.
[3] U. Saiidi, Social media making millenials less social: Study. CNBC.com. (October 17, 2015); https://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/15/social-media-making-millennials-less-social-study.html.
[4] S. Weiser, Americans are becoming less social. mentalfloss.com. (June 12, 2015); https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/65065/americans-are-becoming-less-social.
[5] Consumers like self-service more than associate interaction, reveals survey, Retailcustomerexperience.com, (January 24, 2018); https://www.retailcustomerexperience.com/news/consumers-like-self-service-more-than-associate-interaction-reveals-survey/.
[6] O. Schwartz, Love in the time of AI: Meet the people falling for scripted robots. The Guardian. (September 6, 2018).
[7] Marvin, R., Tech addiction by the numbers: How much time we spend online. PCMag. (June 11, 2018); https://www.pcmag.com/article/361587/tech-addiction-by-the-numbers-how-much-time-we-spend-online.
[8] Tamir, D. I., Templeton, E. M., Ward, A. F., & Zaki, J. Media usage diminishes memory for experiences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2018.
[9] R. Reid. Most under-25s can’t read a map because they rely on sat-navs. Cnet.com. (October 10, 2013); https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/most-under-25s-cant-read-a-map-because-they-rely-on-sat-navs/.
[10] S. Berger. Tech-free dinners and no smartphones past 10 pm — how Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Mark Cuban limited their kids. CNBC.com. (June 5, 2018); https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/05/how-bill-gates-mark-cuban-and-others-limit-their-kids-tech-use.html.
[11] A. Gregory. How social media is hurting your memory. Time. (May 8, 2018); https://time.com/5267710/social-media-hurts-memory/.

In 1994, a gap in the online book-sales market was closed by a 30-year-old former hedge fund executive. Within five years, his site had expanded its offerings both to a greater market and to include other merchandise, such as software, toys, and home-improvement items [1]. Amazon.com also expanded as a service, allowing other online merchants to sell goods using its platform. Amazon Web Services, which both tracks website traffic for use in advertisements and rents space for data storage and computer processing power, cemented the dominance of the once-humble bookseller.

Since then, the technological giant has become a superpower in online sales, and the target of criticism for, among other things, worker compensation and factory conditions [2]. When confronted with the truth of companies such as this one, the initial reaction may be to boycott its products, but for Amazon, that is not possible [3]. Nearly one-thousand other businesses use Amazon Web Services to host their websites, which means that boycotting all of the giant’s products would entail protesting otherwise-neutral companies such as Intuit or Airbnb [4]. This human-cultivated technology, among many others, has overgrown so that it now snakes its way from the once-obscure internet into the everyday lives of humans. What started as a single rose has grown into a thorny bramble.

Slaves in the Red Queen’s Race

A common practice for companies like Amazon is to acquire tech startups before they can grow into true competitors. Therefore, the next tech giant will need to overcome this “aqui-hire” practice in order to establish itself in the market. Similarly, on a more global scale, countries must garner technology that is becoming increasingly expensive to mature into the “developed” Western standards of living. Confronted with growing barriers, developing nations must run the Red Queen’s race to enter the Information Age. In the words of Lewis Carroll’s character, “It takes all the running you can do, to keep the same pace” [5]. In short, technology is advancing faster than maturing countries, and industry startups, can hope to keep pace with.

This cleaving effect of technology—the rich get richer, the poor poorer—is observable on a more local industrial scale. Within the United States, technological advances demonstrate disparate effects. For example, IT makes way for more creativity and fewer repetitive tasks in higher-skill jobs, while automation threatens the livelihoods of people holding low and medium skill jobs. The poor must, therefore, work more hours in disappearing jobs to afford the new technology necessary for economic advancement. As technology pushes farther out in the race, those who cultivate the new technology rush ahead, while the others collapse in the dust. People – whether cultivators or users, whether knowingly or not, are letting technology enslave humanity.

Addictive by Design

We humans remain tethered to technology by the data mining and machine learning algorithms that harvest us. Our information fills big datasets devoted to training new artificial intelligence to capture our attention and undermine our control for the sake of money and, in some ways, power. Social Media follow us from online realtors to late-night pizza orders. To fuel our spending and pull us by the wrist into that next impulse purchase [6], our daily digital applications are infused with false scarcity and the appearance of free money. We are addicted to technology, tingling with dopaminergic impulses to reach the next level of Candy Crush, read the latest notification on our Pixel smartphone, achieve the next hundredth like on Instagram or Facebook.

In this present state of technology, each one of us is a slave. Even the champions of the common man—the user experience professionals—acknowledge the addictive properties of technology in the jargon they use when referring to their constituents: “We must remember the users!” Whether or not technology cultivators recognize the gravity of what they are doing, their outputs are addictive.

This does not mean the addictive design of technology is always “bad.” There are fitness applications that prey upon our fallibility, in the ways pioneered by Silicon Valley, to convince us to start moving, keep eating well, and forgive ourselves when we fail [7,8]. There are budgeting applications that teach us to be money savvy [9], to critically consider the next order placed on Amazon [10] for that strange tchotchke that will stare out at you while you eat ramen to make up for its presence. There are even applications that seek to remind us of exactly how much time we spend with our devices [11] and allow us to block sites that serve as distractions [12]. Users can be manipulated for good, too, it seems.

Users, Cultivators, Masters

Recently, people have begun to fight back. Concluding humans-as-slaves to be the only answer is a lazy escape, for we too are the “master[s] of [our] fate, the captain[s] of [our] soul[s]” [13]. When the political system and traditional media fail us, we can and have turned to technology to control discourse, to course correct the mainstream of our societies. In 2011, the Arab Spring was documented through social media and organized through secure forms of technology-based communication [14]. The Occupy movement was born on Twitter and manifested actual political protests [15]. Often, when the 45th POTUS has derailed the US national media, people have used technology to reign attention in on things that matter—for instance, the fires that ravaged the Amazon in the summer of 2019 [16].

Technology is not neutral—it is created by people to fill a need or perform a function, with little leeway. Nonetheless, it is created by people. We decide what is important to us.
We are leaving the world of technology slaves to become the technology’s masters, and it’s not a difficult power balance to overturn when you act intentionally—whether you are a user or a cultivator. As users, we have a responsibility to ourselves to be mindful of our connections to the world around us. We have tools. We have legislative power, if we reach for it, as Spanish residents have within the EU [17]. We can make the change if we want it. As cultivators, we have a responsibility to openly communicate with our consumers. We have an extraordinary ability to alter behaviors and change lives. With that ability, that power, comes extraordinary responsibility.

Technology need not be deterministic; society chooses when and how to implement technology. Humans foster its evolution, its innovation. In the struggle for control with our technology, people will emerge as users, cultivators, and masters.

References

1. Hall, M. (Oct 17, 2019). Amazon.com. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/Amazoncom
2. Wohlfeil, S. Workers describe pressures at Amazon warehouses as Bernie Sanders gears up to make the corporation pay. Inlander. Retrieved from https://www.inlander.com/spokane/workers-describe-pressures-at-amazon-warehouses-as-sen-bernie-sanders-gears-up-to-make-the-corporation-pay/Content?oid=12226281
3. Hill, K. (Feb 7, 2019). I cut the ‘Big Five’ tech giants from my life. It was hell. Gizmodo. Retrieved from https://gizmodo.com/i-cut-the-big-five-tech-giants-from-my-life-it-was-hel-1831304194
4. aws.amazon.com. (n.d.) Case Studies. AWS customer success. Retrieved from https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/case-studies/?customer-references-cards.sort-by=item.additionalFields.publishedDate&customer-references-cards.sort-order=desc
5. Carrol, L. (2016). The garden of live flowers. Through the looking glass and what Alice found there (Chapter 2). Retrieved from https://www.gutenberg.org/files/12/12-h/12-h.htm (Original work published 1872).
6. George-Parkin, H. (July 15, 2019). The psychology of sales explained. Vox. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/7/15/20694723/psychology-sales-prime-day-fomo-scarcity
7. 8fit GmbH. (2019). 8fit [Mobile application software]. Accessible from https://8fit.com
8. Noom, Inc. (2019). Noom [Mobile application software]. Accessible from https://www.noom.com
9. Intuit, Inc. (2019). Mint [Mobile application software]. Accessible from https://www.mint.com
10. Cleo AI LTD. (2019). Cleo [Mobile application software]. Accessible from https://meetcleo.com
11. Moment Health Inc. (2019). Moment [Mobile application software]. Accessible from https://inthemoment.io/
12. Freedom.to. (2019) Freedom [Mobile application software]. Accessible from https://freedom.to/
13. Henley, W.E. (n.d.). Invictus. Retrieved from https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/51642/invictus (Original work published 1888)
14. History.com Editors. (Apr 5, 2019). Arab Spring. Retrieved from https://www.history.com/topics/middle-east/arab-spring
15. Greene, B. (Oct 17, 2011). How ‘Occupy Wall Street’ started and spread. U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/news/washington-whispers/articles/2011/10/17/how-occupy-wall-street-started-and-spread
16. Nawrat, A. (Sept 6, 2019). Have you heard the Amazon is on fire? The power of social media in awareness raising. Verdict. https://www.verdict.co.uk/amazon-fires-social-media/
17. Epic.org. (Sept 25, 2019). The right to be forgotten (Google v. Spain). Electronic privacy information center. Retrieved from https://epic.org/privacy/right-to-be-forgotten/