Recommender systems have now become a ubiquitous feature of digital platforms. They influence user exposure to various forms of content, guiding – sometimes even subliminally but effectively dictating – their online experiences. However, as these systems continue gaining traction and prominence, there is a growing need to critically evaluate their societal impact, with a specific emphasis on a perceived need to promote positive social outcomes rather than merely prioritising the user’s platform engagement and usage time. This paper explores the multifaceted challenges of this endeavour, underscoring first and foremost the formidable complexities of defining what constitutes “positive social outcomes” and for which category of stakeholder those positive social outcomes accrue, and then delving into the challenges of embedding ‘appropriate’ norms and values that align with ‘positive social outcomes’ into recommender systems. This requires a holistic view of user experience, an understanding of the socio-ethical and political-economic dimensions of technology and the economics of technology business, and last but not least the active participation of a diverse array of stakeholders.

To start with, a comprehensive elucidation of ‘positive social outcomes’ must be derived. This is not merely heuristic in scope, but is a fundamental building block – and indeed, the sine qua non – of arriving at any meaningful conclusions with respect to social outcome evaluations, and this elucidation must thus be one that acknowledges the multifaceted, often conflicting interests of different stakeholders, which can range from platform users and profit-motivated owners, to broader socio-political entities and groupings. At the same time, it is critical to address the potential dichotomy between commercial interests, such as maximising platform engagement and commercial engagement valorisation on the one hand, and ethical and regulatory imperatives, like fostering information diversity or maintaining user privacy, on the other. Moreover, it necessitates the delineation of what makes norms and values ‘appropriate’ – a concept that is highly-controversial, context-dependent, chronologically- and spatially- dynamic, and thereby incredibly complex and fraught with uncertainty and subjectivity.