Our AI writing assistant, WriteUp, can assist you in easily writing any text. Click here to experience its capabilities.

The myth of the online echo chamber

View Original View Raw

Summary

In the 2000s, Cass Sunstein warned of the risks of creating 'echo chambers' and 'filter bubbles' online where people only interacted with like-minded people and would become more polarized in their views. However, recent studies have found that most people are more likely to seek out news sources with diverse views than previously thought, and that attempts to expose people to a range of sources often backfire as people become more entrenched in their views. The problems with political discourse online seem to come from people's unconscious reactions to different views, rather than the range of voices they come across. Media literacy classes may help to counter online disharmony, but further research is needed.

Q&As

What warning did US legal scholar Cass Sunstein offer in the early 2000s about the internet?
US legal scholar Cass Sunstein warned that the internet might allow people to establish homogenous groups who all share the same viewpoints and gather their information from the same sources, leading to greater polarisation in a country’s politics.

What does Elizabeth Dubois at the University of Ottawa suggest about the filter bubble?
Elizabeth Dubois at the University of Ottawa suggests that the filter bubble is created by technology platforms that preferentially promote stories on a user's feed based on what they are more likely to click on.

What do Seth Flaxman and colleagues at Oxford University suggest about online echo chambers?
Seth Flaxman and colleagues at Oxford University suggest that social media and search users tend to land upon more polarised news sources, but they are also more likely to visit sites expressing opposing viewpoints, leading to a more varied media diet overall.

What did Christopher Bail at Duke University discover in their study of 1,600 Twitter users?
Christopher Bail at Duke University discovered that when they paid people a small fee to follow a 'bot' that would retweet influencers from across the political divide, most simply came to be more confident of their initial beliefs, with Republicans becoming significantly more conservative.

What does Jonathan Haidt suggest may be the cause of political polarisation online?
Jonathan Haidt suggests that the problems of political discourse online come from people's unconscious reactions to dissenting voices, such as motivated reasoning and self-licensing, leading to more hostile environments for debate.

AI Comments

👍 This article provides an in-depth look at the topic of online echo chambers and filter bubbles, exploring the risks and misconceptions of the issue. It offers a great range of research and examples to back up the points being made.

👎 The article is overly long and could have been more concise, making it difficult to read and digest the information presented.

AI Discussion

Me: It's called "The Myth of the Online Echo Chamber" and it discusses how there is a common belief that social media and online platforms create echo chambers where people only get exposed to one type of opinion, leading to greater political polarization. But the article argues that the truth might actually be the opposite - that people are actually exposed to more diverse opinions online than they would be if they only relied on direct browsing. It also looks at how our unconscious reactions to those diverse views can lead to increased political polarization.

Friend: That's really interesting. It kind of makes sense that we would be exposed to more diverse opinions online since there are so many sources of information that are easily accessible. But I'm surprised to hear that this could lead to increased polarization.

Me: Yeah, it's definitely counterintuitive. The article suggests that this happens because of motivated reasoning and self-licensing - people become more attached to their preconceived beliefs and more confident in them as they are exposed to different views. Also, the article implies that there is more to the political polarization than just social media and online echo chambers. It suggests that we need to consider other factors like the deliberate manipulation of social media and the spread of misinformation. It also suggests that media literacy classes may help counter online disharmony.

Action items

Take a media literacy class to learn how to identify bias in an argument.
Follow influencers from across the political divide on social media to gain a more balanced view of the world.
Make an effort to read news sources that express opposing viewpoints to your own.

Technical terms

Echo Chamber: A situation in which people are exposed only to opinions or information that reinforces their own views, making it difficult to consider alternative perspectives.
Filter Bubble: A situation in which a website algorithm selectively guesses what information a user would like to see based on information about the user, such as location, past click-behavior and search history.
Daily Me: A term used to describe the idea that people can customize their online experience to only see information that reinforces their own views.
Motivated Reasoning: A cognitive process in which people seek out information that confirms their existing beliefs and ignore information that contradicts them.
Self-Licensing: The unconscious belief that once we have shown our open-mindedness in one situation, we have somehow earned the credentials to be more prejudiced later on.