Is the Internet Polarizing Politics?

[Flopper]

Has the Internet elevated political conversation by increasing interaction between average citizens? Or is it plunging the country into an abyss of partisanship and ignorance?

These are troublesome questions for even the most fervent digital optimist. It doesn't take an expert to see that what passes for informed debate online can often be petty, stupid, and even hateful. Instead of searching out new perspectives, all too many users flock to websites that support their views, pop out occasionally to post an angry comment somewhere else, and then flee back to the comfort of Red State or Paul Krugman.

Search engines and social networks filter out dissenting opinions and offer users only what they want to see. Google and Yahoo draw on a user’s past search preferences when responding to queries, meaning that over time a liberal and a conservative might receive ideologically opposite search results having entered identical information.

The current Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, shows how the Internet creates “echo chambers” where users surround themselves only with the like-minded. This not only preserves partisanship—it exacerbates it. Sunstein found that pro-choice liberals become more pro-choice if they interact only with other liberals, and anti-abortion conservatives become more anti-abortion after surrounding themselves with other conservatives. The niche driven nature of the Internet is pushing us further and further apart.

Is the Internet Polarizing Politics Big Think

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Politics has always been polarized, the internet just makes it louder.

 

[Flopper]

Politics has always been polarized, the internet just makes it louder.

Just like TV commercials, repeat a lie often enough and loud enough and people will believe.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Politics has always been polarized, the internet just makes it louder.

Just like TV commercials, repeat a lie often enough and loud enough and people will believe.

No.

People believe the lies that they want to believe. It's always been that way. The number of times they hear the lies is irrelevant.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes and yes.

 

[shart_attack]

Politics has always been polarized, the internet just makes it louder.

Just like TV commercials, repeat a lie often enough and loud enough and people will believe.

Says a far-left liberal. And one who happens to be so retarded that he only just now began to ponder the question posed in his thread's OP.

Go figure.

Look in the mirror, motherfucker

 

[Valerie]

it's definitely contributing but mostly that opinion was also derived in an echo chamber chamber chamber...

couple hundred people at most here. a mere microcosm perhaps...

 

[deltex1]

Welcome back Shart...a nice subtle re entry I see......

 

[Menerva Lindsen]

Politics has always been polarized, the internet just makes it louder.

Good idea but it also can help the consensus sometimes. However politicts actually splits the society. So maybe Internet is a free arena to argue and find the truth for yourself. But politics is always a lie...

 

[occupied]

We are faced with far too much information and a nation full of people with faulty bullshit detectors.The internet is giving people who have radical or loony opinions confirmation of their fears and prejudices. It is a fact that people are far more polarized than they used to be and I blame the internet, or actually I blame willful liars on the internet with no sense of integrity. Having said that I would not trade it for how it used to be with just 3 networks, a half-dozen news magazines and the newspaper, it was far too easy to control information.

 

[blackhawk]

The polarizing nature in politics is not a new thing it's been there before there was TV, talk radio, or the internet/social media this is just newest outlet for it. There will always be people who see things one way and one way only with or without the net.

 

[occupied]

The polarizing nature in politics is not a new thing it's been there before there was TV, talk radio, or the internet/social media this is just newest outlet for it. There will always be people who see things one way and one way only with or without the net.

There used to be enough overlap between the two parties to guarantee that a least the important things could get done, now we have congressmen calling the president a socialist because he supports the things their own party supported twenty years ago. No we have a brand new kind of sickness at work here where the definitions of political terms like fascist, socialist, conservative, liberal, etc. have been twisted until people cannot even talk to each other anymore because we speak two entirely different political languages.

 

[Sonny Clark]

Has the Internet elevated political conversation by increasing interaction between average citizens? Or is it plunging the country into an abyss of partisanship and ignorance?

These are troublesome questions for even the most fervent digital optimist. It doesn't take an expert to see that what passes for informed debate online can often be petty, stupid, and even hateful. Instead of searching out new perspectives, all too many users flock to websites that support their views, pop out occasionally to post an angry comment somewhere else, and then flee back to the comfort of Red State or Paul Krugman.

Search engines and social networks filter out dissenting opinions and offer users only what they want to see. Google and Yahoo draw on a user’s past search preferences when responding to queries, meaning that over time a liberal and a conservative might receive ideologically opposite search results having entered identical information.

The current Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, shows how the Internet creates “echo chambers” where users surround themselves only with the like-minded. This not only preserves partisanship—it exacerbates it. Sunstein found that pro-choice liberals become more pro-choice if they interact only with other liberals, and anti-abortion conservatives become more anti-abortion after surrounding themselves with other conservatives. The niche driven nature of the Internet is pushing us further and further apart.

Is the Internet Polarizing Politics Big Think

The reference to division makes a lot of sense. Yes, the internet gives voice to what was once silent. We get news faster, get more views and opinions, and get information from so-called experts. We've been divided forever, but the internet has divided us even more, and to a greater extent. We now have ammunition to fire back at our opponents that we didn't have before the internet. Information, especially charts filled with the latest data and stats, are at our finger tips within seconds when needed. Our wars of words are enhanced by the availability of information from around the globe, and from around the corner. Human nature causes us to inject bias into every conversation, and even more so when it comes to politics and religion.

Politics, like religion, is one of those conversations where a clear winner in a debate is never declared, and can't be, it's impossible. There are way too many variables, too many "IF's", too many hands in the pie to pin down blame, and way too many pros and cons that one could use to cancel out the other. Division is natural, not necessarily good, but none the less, natural. With over 6 billion people living on this planet, it's a given that we also have nearly that many different views and opinions. There's no solution, no right opinion, and no wrong opinion. We each express what we honestly feel is right, true, and accurate.

Where division hurts everyone, is when division become submission, which then turns into oppression. Right now, we are not only a submissive people, society, and nation, but we are also an oppressed people and society. Our division has allowed power and authority to fall into the wrong hands. We have allowed those with power and authority to gain complete control over our lives, over our socioeconomic well-being, and to an extent, our future and the future of generations to come. We have failed to unite in order to preserve over 200 years of socioeconomic progress. We are now taking two steps backward for every one step forward.

The internet has fed us information to the extent that it not only educates us, but it saturates us with misinformation, distorted half-truths, and bias from every conceivable angle possible. We are now in a war within ourselves, trying to separate the wheat from the chaff, make sense out of things that go against everything we thought we knew and believed to be fact, and at the same time, attempt to understand the meaning of it all. We're forced to read between the lines, and to pay more attention to what's not said, as opposed to what is said. The internet has given us a tool to interact with each other, to communicate our thoughts and opinions, and to see things from the view held by millions, instead of a few neighbors or friends. We live in a golden age, an age of Hi-tech and split second communication, and an age of global expression of thoughts and ideas.

Yes, we are divided, very divided. But who's to say that it's because of technology or the internet. If the truth be known, we've always been divided, but without the internet and modern technology, we may have never known the extent that we were divided. Politics is an issues that has been discussed for many thousands of years, and will be discussed for thousands more. The internet doesn't change politics, and it doesn't change the fact that we're divided. What it does do, is bring politics front and center so more people are basically forced to pay attention to it. It makes daily headlines, it's on every news broadcast, and in every newspaper. The internet brings politics out of the shadows and into full light, exposing it, and allowing us to see for ourselves the workings of a machine that controls almost every aspect of our lives.

 

[Flopper]

Politics has always been polarized, the internet just makes it louder.

Just like TV commercials, repeat a lie often enough and loud enough and people will believe.

No.

People believe the lies that they want to believe. It's always been that way. The number of times they hear the lies is irrelevant.

A lot of advertising people would disagree but whatever...

 

[AvgGuyIA]

To its credit, the USMessageboard is not an echo chamber like DemocraticUnderground and FreeRepublic.

 

[Flopper]

al or

The polarizing nature in politics is not a new thing it's been there before there was TV, talk radio, or the internet/social media this is just newest outlet for it. There will always be people who see things one way and one way only with or without the net.

I agree, however I believe it is the very nature of people to seek confirmation of their opinion and the Internet tends to echo back a confirmation. When we use a search engine, the software uses our history of sites visited to order the display of results so a person sees their favor websites toward the top of the list, very useful at times but it also reduces the number of web sites displayed with opposing opinions.

The echo chamber effect can be very damaging when the item being investigated is to silly or preposterous to attract reliable news sources. Far left or far right web sites, depending on the story repeat it over and over adding minor enhancements. For the causal web surfer, the very number of web sites reporting the issue adds credence to the report.

The Internet is a wonderful research tool, however too many people use it to confirm their opinion and filter out the opposition. Yes, we can do the same thing with a newspaper, TV, or magazine but it's harder.

 

[Flopper]

Has the Internet elevated political conversation by increasing interaction between average citizens? Or is it plunging the country into an abyss of partisanship and ignorance?

These are troublesome questions for even the most fervent digital optimist. It doesn't take an expert to see that what passes for informed debate online can often be petty, stupid, and even hateful. Instead of searching out new perspectives, all too many users flock to websites that support their views, pop out occasionally to post an angry comment somewhere else, and then flee back to the comfort of Red State or Paul Krugman.

Search engines and social networks filter out dissenting opinions and offer users only what they want to see. Google and Yahoo draw on a user’s past search preferences when responding to queries, meaning that over time a liberal and a conservative might receive ideologically opposite search results having entered identical information.

The current Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, shows how the Internet creates “echo chambers” where users surround themselves only with the like-minded. This not only preserves partisanship—it exacerbates it. Sunstein found that pro-choice liberals become more pro-choice if they interact only with other liberals, and anti-abortion conservatives become more anti-abortion after surrounding themselves with other conservatives. The niche driven nature of the Internet is pushing us further and further apart.

Is the Internet Polarizing Politics Big Think

The reference to division makes a lot of sense. Yes, the internet gives voice to what was once silent. We get news faster, get more views and opinions, and get information from so-called experts. We've been divided forever, but the internet has divided us even more, and to a greater extent. We now have ammunition to fire back at our opponents that we didn't have before the internet. Information, especially charts filled with the latest data and stats, are at our finger tips within seconds when needed. Our wars of words are enhanced by the availability of information from around the globe, and from around the corner. Human nature causes us to inject bias into every conversation, and even more so when it comes to politics and religion.

Politics, like religion, is one of those conversations where a clear winner in a debate is never declared, and can't be, it's impossible. There are way too many variables, too many "IF's", too many hands in the pie to pin down blame, and way too many pros and cons that one could use to cancel out the other. Division is natural, not necessarily good, but none the less, natural. With over 6 billion people living on this planet, it's a given that we also have nearly that many different views and opinions. There's no solution, no right opinion, and no wrong opinion. We each express what we honestly feel is right, true, and accurate.

Where division hurts everyone, is when division become submission, which then turns into oppression. Right now, we are not only a submissive people, society, and nation, but we are also an oppressed people and society. Our division has allowed power and authority to fall into the wrong hands. We have allowed those with power and authority to gain complete control over our lives, over our socioeconomic well-being, and to an extent, our future and the future of generations to come. We have failed to unite in order to preserve over 200 years of socioeconomic progress. We are now taking two steps backward for every one step forward.

The internet has fed us information to the extent that it not only educates us, but it saturates us with misinformation, distorted half-truths, and bias from every conceivable angle possible. We are now in a war within ourselves, trying to separate the wheat from the chaff, make sense out of things that go against everything we thought we knew and believed to be fact, and at the same time, attempt to understand the meaning of it all. We're forced to read between the lines, and to pay more attention to what's not said, as opposed to what is said. The internet has given us a tool to interact with each other, to communicate our thoughts and opinions, and to see things from the view held by millions, instead of a few neighbors or friends. We live in a golden age, an age of Hi-tech and split second communication, and an age of global expression of thoughts and ideas.

Yes, we are divided, very divided. But who's to say that it's because of technology or the internet. If the truth be known, we've always been divided, but without the internet and modern technology, we may have never known the extent that we were divided. Politics is an issues that has been discussed for many thousands of years, and will be discussed for thousands more. The internet doesn't change politics, and it doesn't change the fact that we're divided. What it does do, is bring politics front and center so more people are basically forced to pay attention to it. It makes daily headlines, it's on every news broadcast, and in every newspaper. The internet brings politics out of the shadows and into full light, exposing it, and allowing us to see for ourselves the workings of a machine that controls almost every aspect of our lives.

Good points. No doubt the Internet keeps us better informed and involves more people in politics which is good. However, it also tends to eliminate the middle in favor of the left or right. Almost everyone has an opinion and usually a strong one on gay marriage, healthcare, ISIS, Cuba, or gun control, or immigration or whatever. Those strong opinions echo through the halls of congress and make if very difficult to reach compromises so nothing get's done.