Mastodawn

Xerø Jan 17, 2023

Mike Masnick ✅

I keep having interesting debates with people here on Mastodon, disproving the idea that it's an "echo chamber." But a few days ago, someone insisted to me that social media was obviously a net negative on society, and when someone else asked him to back that up, the user indicated that it had created echo chambers, and pointed to a short list of studies. I pointed out that the actual research did not support his conclusions, and he told me I had not read far enough... (continued...)

Mike Masnick ✅Jan 17, 2023

... I responded by highlighting the summary of one of the links *he* posted (a meta study of many studies), saying... the opposite. That research said: "In summary, the work reviewed here suggests echo chambers are much less widespread than is commonly assumed, finds no support for the filter bubble hypothesis..."

In response... that user blocked me.

So, yeah, I mean, I guess sometimes it does create echo chambers & filter bubbles. If you choose to respond that way...

Joé McKen Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick I’ve always felt that “echo chambers“ and “filter bubbles” only happen if you *let* them, or especially if you actively seek them out. I’ve only had my own experience to base that on, but it’s been nice to see it bolstered by actual research.

Joé McKen Jan 17, 2023

PERSON: <deliberately only follows people they agree with and blocks everyone who even slightly challenges them>

SAME PERSON: Social media turns us all into same-minded echo-chamber-dwellers! This is Facebook/Twitter’s fault!

Yohannon Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick Which is why I don't reflexively block people because they said ONE THING (or even several) I disagreed with; sure there are red lines (like claiming the 2020 election was stolen for example), but the whole reason I do social media at all (going all the way back to BBS's in the 80's) is to be CHALLENGED. I can be swayed by solid arguments, and if I'm following correct the other side likewise.

But then I actually READ the receipts before I send them too. 🤷‍♂️

Curmudgeon Jan 17, 2023

@yohannon @mmasnick
Exactly this.
If I wanted to only talk with those who have the same views I do, I could just talk to myself.
Okay, I do that too.

Yohannon Jan 17, 2023

@jetton @mmasnick I see your conversations with self, and raise it to arguments where I take both sides. Like playing chess, only more compartmentalized. 😉

Social interaction is literally the only reason my severe ADHD (and likely AuDHD) hasn't left me broken and alone; my self assessment sucks, but social networking can be the mirror I can't seem to see myself in on my own.

Curmudgeon Jan 17, 2023

@yohannon @mmasnick
It's when I lose arguments with myself that I start to worry.

Dancingwiththebeloved Jan 18, 2023

@jetton @yohannon @mmasnick cur - you shouldn't worry about all those lost arguments unless they make you depressed to the point of selling all your shit and moving into a cave. THEN you should worry.

Michael P Stein Jan 17, 2023

@yohannon @mmasnick
I only block for spam (after reporting). I don't even do retaliatory blocks against people who block me.

Freezenet Jan 18, 2023

@yohannon @mmasnick Me neither. I don't mind speaking people I disagree with. In fact, some of the more interesting people I talk to about certain issues happen to also park their political leanings on the opposite side of the political spectrum from me.

It's when the other person just resorts to relentless name calling with zero challenge to my responses that the block button ends up getting some exercise. There's a difference between politely disagreeing on something and being a jerk.

KenB Jan 28, 2023

@yohannon @mmasnick while I understand the red line with the 2020 election, I find that by not blocking them but challenging what they post instead, eventually they block me.

That Anonymous Coward Jan 17, 2023

The technological equivalent of stick his fingers in his ears and going lalalalalalaal can't hear you

kingdom krumb Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick I have certainly noticed a number of people these day whose brains are broken. Belief in wild conspiracy theories abounds and fascism seems to have been on the rise in many places around the world. I assume that social media (and online "news" sources) has played a big role in that. Not so? Is that just an illusion?

Joan Van Tassel Jan 17, 2023

@kingdomkrumb @mmasnick I wonder if there isn't a relationship between pandemics (or other public shocks) and widespread public lunacy and panics. But maybe not always. There are cases throughout history - medieval period, 18th and 19th century in Europe (witches) and U.S. (Salem witches) that I've heard of. Probably more that I just don't know about.

kingdom krumb Jan 17, 2023

@JoanVT @mmasnick Definitely. The thing is, the election of DJT happened before the pandemic. Things were actually pretty good. Perhaps in the US, one could point to the growing Latino population + election of a black president as triggering a backlash from whites. But the turn to toward nationalism has been seen in other countries too, like Brazil and India.

Joan Van Tassel Jan 17, 2023

@kingdomkrumb @mmasnick

At the risk of controversy, I believe that If Clinton had publicly and openly apologized for the private server, held regular press conferences, and acted like she enjoyed campaigning (and not like a cornered animal), she would have won the election. Similarly, when he stalked her during that terrible debate, if she had turned around and said: "stop sneaking around, Mr. Trump. I'm not scared of bullies and I'm not giving ground.

Joan Van Tassel Jan 17, 2023

@kingdomkrumb @mmasnick Skulk back to your own corner." I don't think Trump won; I think Clinton lost. And I was very sad about it.
The global move toward authoritarianism is real. It is the last, worst act of global capitalism, seeking even more than it's almost total grip on world economy. Billionaires are not satisfied with anything less than their own fantasy world private islands with the rest of the world enslaved to their capricious interests. I leave you with Twitter & Epstein.

Dancingwiththebeloved Jan 18, 2023

@JoanVT @kingdomkrumb @mmasnick no, public lunacy became most evident five years before the pandemic 🤪🤣

Tallish_Tom Jan 17, 2023

@kingdomkrumb @mmasnick
Widespread belief in wild conspiracy theories & fascism have certainly happened before, so Social Media's role is probably more nuanced than "being the reason".
Algorithms that generate "engagement", where engagement = eyballs & clicks may be an amplifier.
OTOH, simply having more links may be the only amplifier needed.
People spent most of history interacting with, probably, 100 people at most, & far fewer regularly.
We are not built for this environment.

Patrick McLaughlin Jan 17, 2023

You failed his echo chamber — and were ejected from it.

🇳𝗮ꜟ𝖼𝘩 Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick I have created my own echo chamber here at Mastodon. It's full of people who aren't arseholes. What's wrong with that?

Frank Bennett 🇯🇵Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick The nickname proudly adopted by fans of talk radio star Rush Limbaugh (now off the air because he's dead) was "dittoheads." They built an echo chamber and called it such, because they, like their idol, saw that as a source of strength.

Frigga MotherOf Border Collies Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick It may not be filter bubble hypothesis so much as a “confirmatory-bias” hypothesis. I was thinking about Fox News viewers, who seem to be convinced that only Fox tells them the truth. In the 1980s, the Glasgow University Media Group performed studies of media bias, which concluded that limited exposure to a range of ideological positions was not due to explicit media bias but the preference of consumers who selected media sources (newspapers) that confirmed existing ideological beliefs

fallingbeam Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick @wongmjane What these studies typically find is that people exactly don't encounter "echo chambers," you're right.

However, what does happen is that because they are being exposed to a variety of views, they often encounter people with contrary views to their own.

For better or worse - and this is not what your interaction was - this often takes the form of triggered people who have unhappy reactions to those with different opinions.

When that happens, it convinces people there are "sides." And when they think there are sides, they feel they have to take a side. That's typically what leads to polarization online.

The discussion you had seems to be as positive a way to approach this as any. To calmly/gently pull things back to facts and rigorous research. That way it's not about you and them/sides. It's about what reality is in terms of facts, analysis and context.

We can disagree on how we view things. But we can at least agree on what the facts are, what reality is :P . Hopefully.

Edit: wanted to provide a citation for what I talk about above. Economist article reviewing a book written about how social media promotes political polarization https://archive.ph/lNpG3

archive.ph

Jari Pennanen Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick Opt-in filter bubbles is Mastodon's best feature.

When a server blocks another server, it reduces tensions, it makes this less like the outrage machine that Twitter turned into. It allows communities to protect their people from hate speech, and other untoward behavior.

If I do not agree with my server blocking, I can then move* to another server.

(* There are still technical issues that need to be fixed regarding moving.)

mastadon's illegitimate child Jan 18, 2023

@mmasnick send link of this study pls

Mike Masnick ✅Jan 18, 2023

@paresh_hate here it is: https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/echo-chambers-filter-bubbles-and-polarisation-literature-review

Sarah T. Roberts, Ph.D.Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick (was this debate occurring on social media? That would be *mwah*.)

Mike Masnick ✅Jan 17, 2023

@ubiquity75 of course!

Sarah T. Roberts, Ph.D.Jan 17, 2023

robpennoyer Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick Do you think social media is a net positive?

Mike Masnick ✅Jan 17, 2023

@robpennoyer I do.

robpennoyer Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick Impossible to quantify, obviously, but shouldn't the burden of proof be on the positive side? To me it seems clear, now, that humans were not meant to be directly connected to millions or billions of other people, and certainly not by algorithms designed to increase ad revenue. But I don't have another planet to a/b test with.

Aaron Huslage Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick algorithms that prioritize only engagement will always skew the lived experiences of some. They engage with content that is actually bad for them by commenting or downvoting or whatever and it creates, for them, a bubble.

felix (grayscale) 🐺Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick When someone talks about online echo chambers or filter bubbles, I'm always curious what their image of life before the Internet is like, and what factors of that life prevent offline echo chambers and filter bubbles

Micah Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick I once heard an economist claim that alcohol was a net benefit to society because it brings so many people happiness. People who complain that social media is awful and never should have been invented are making the same mistake.

Yes there are lots of negative externalities, yes some people are way too deep, but there is also a huge base level of utility that impacts nearly every human.

stealthswor Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick
Echo chambers aren't even that bad compared to internet fights

Zoomer Antimillenarian Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick Getting sucked into an echo chamber and adopting a position of extreme epistemic closure are not the same thing. Social media, at its worst, degenerates not so much into an echo chamber as into a bunch of belligerent, fairly closed-minded factions bickering endlessly with each other.

Noah Cook Jan 17, 2023

@mmasnick I think that some people blame social media for inevitable human problems in much the same way that I might blame my knees or my back the day after a long hike or mountain climb that goes beyond what a 40 year-old man should reasonably do.

But as long as humans are imperfect, we will always search for an explanation for imperfection that doesn't begin with "maybe I shouldn't..."