Reflecting on Our 'Tech for Good' Reality Check

As we near the end of our series, our special ‘Tech for Good Reality Checks’ advent series has been a journey through the complexities and challenges of implementing technology for societal benefit. Here's a summary of the things we went through:

We started by examining challenges in digital Inclusion and accessibility, going through public sector digital accessibility struggles and businesses' reluctance for inclusive tech, followed by discussions on the decline of digital and physical accessibility post-pandemic.

We explored the superficiality of tech initiatives that often feel like a new form of greenwashing, as well as how some of them are driven by marketing and seeking profits instead of serving social good, sustaining prevailing power dynamics.

Some of our posts aimed to highlight the failure of some tech initiatives to deliver promised impacts and the subsequent decline in quality and societal value, known as 'enshittification'. Particularly, we emphasised the paradox of social media platforms that claim to connect people but in reality promote isolation and harm society.

We contemplated the compromises Tech for Good startups make under investor pressure, we critiqued B Corp’s practices, and reflected on businesses like Etsy struggling to balance profit with values.

We also delved into the challenges small charities face in digital adoption, and how high tech salaries contrast with social impact needs.

Throughout the series, we often looked at AI's ethical complexities, emphasising the need for responsible AI usage considering privacy, biases, job displacement, and environmental impacts.

Through this series, we've seen that Tech for Good initiatives exist in a complex and challenging reality. Our hope is if we stay mindful of these challenges, we can shape a more inclusive and effective technology landscape.