Eli Pariser, an internet activist, introduced the term filter bubble in 2011. Filter bubbles are a form of intellectual isolation that occurs when websites use algorithms to selectively assume what the user wants to see. The website then delivers the content according to collected user activity including, user’s former click behavior, browser history, search history, and location. As a result, websites are more likely to present only the information that coincides with the user’s activities and opinions. Filter bubbles, therefore, can significantly alter a user’s interactions with other users whose viewpoints differ, and; subsequently, leads a user to become intellectually isolated. Praiser demonstrates this filtering with the use of a Google …show more content…
A published opinion piece by Mostafa M. El-Bermawy, exemplifies the issue of filter bubbles. As a liberal, the author’s Facebook newsfeed was filled with Hillary Clinton support because that is what the filter bubble said the user liked. The author of this article is not the only one experiencing this, half the world thought that everyone agreed that Hillary was about to become president because she dominated their social media accounts. Well, little did liberal internet users realize that conservatives were thinking the same thing, but; Trump was looking like the dominant winner on their computer screens. This filter bubble world the liberals were living in up to the election protected them from the thought that Trump even had a chance at winning. Although filter bubbles are not solely responsible for the absolute outrage liberal Americans experienced the day Trump became President; it is too clear of an example of how dangerous intellectual isolation can be to overlook. American liberals would likely still have experienced some feelings towards the election of President Trump; however, they would have been more knowledgeable of both sides of the election before voting day arrived. The Wall Street Journal created the Blue Feed, Red Feed that shows just how different a liberal and conservatives Facebook newsfeed can look when it comes to information about President Trump; the results are
In “How Social Media is Ruining Politics” Carr states that “social media is used to connect with the public” (Carr). Many different types of social media are used for this like Periscope, Snapchat, Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook. Periscope is an application where live videos are streamed and anyone can view the broadcasts posted. Snapchat is an application where pictures, videos, or chats are taken and hen deleted a few seconds after that person sees the Snapchat. Twitter an online news and social application where people post and read short memos called "tweets". YouTube is a site where people around the world share videos that can be seen by anyone. Finally, Facebook is a website that makes it easy to share what is going on in someone’s life and make a connection between people. These resources help give people the connection everyone desires. He also states “both aim to give followers a warm-and-fuzzy feeling” which explains a reason for how it affects people. In “online filter bubbles” Pariser talks about the connection everyone desires is his words saying “we need it to connect us all together” (Pariser). Pariser is stating that people do not only want a connection but that they also need it because it helps us understand what is going on around
Social media has changed the game of politics. In today’s world, with the public looking to smartphones and tablets as their primary source of news, politicians have been forced to adapt the tone and content of their message to fit this new, more connected audience. Perhaps no politician understands this more than notorious billionaire, real estate tycoon, and now presidential candidate, Donald Trump. Through utilization of social media, more specifically Twitter, combined with his disregard for sounding too extreme or politically incorrect, Trump has gained a massive web audience - over four million followers and
Sean Blanda’s, “The Other Side Is Not Dumb”, uses cultural examples concerning the younger American generation involving, the medias influence and peer pressure vs the actual facts and proof, involved while forming a personal opinion. The author emphasizes how the effects of pressure from our surroundings, such as: friends, media, and more, adjust our view of political and social subjects. He includes multiple cases of where your own ignorance can hinder your learning and interaction with others. If you continue to have a negative outlook on people who disagree with you, you’ll never be able to consider yourself a curious person and participate in social media. “We cannot consider ourselves “empathetic” only to turn around and belittle those that don’t agree with us.”- Mr. Blanda
Coverage of events by the mainstream media is politically biased, due to the numerous instances when news networks support one party (either Liberal Democratic or Conservative Republican) and slant the issue in that party’s favor. For example, NBC News reported that the Affordable Care Act was “cheerleading” and viewed the law in a positive manner (Lawrence). As NBC is a major supporter of the Democratic Party, its views are obviously slanted towards liberal and supportive opinions of Obama and his policies. Moreover, this positive perspective of the law only attracts Democrats, and it masks the other perspective involving the detriments of that law, showing presence of propaganda, instilling liberal viewpoints in its unsuspecting audience. In contrast t...
Sunstein continues to say that this ability to filter what one sees may lead them to only view topics of their own mindset and that this is a dangerous habit as it may lead to more extreme views and group polarization. However, others such as critic Simson Garfinkel believe the opposite, championing the internet as a vehicle for endless amounts of information. Sunstein says that the internet should be viewed with caution as it shifts the power of information control to the consumer, others say that the internet has provided that very medium for an infinite amount of information as Garfinkel mentions. Sunstein has failed to consider how accessible, integrated, and interactive social media has become in people’s daily lives around the world. People “like,” “post,” and “share” multiple viewpoints, opinions, and ideas on an array of topics that makes it nearly impossible to use the internet and its many devices without encountering a variety of news, politics, and ideas. This fact has lead and will continue to
There are over 2,405,518,376 internet users on a global scale. More than 50% of the world has a form of Internet censorship, and of those countries China, North Korea, Iran, and Vietnam heavily restrict its citizens. This recent topic has reached new heights in the US with the growing number of internet access. More and more people are debating whether the internet should be censored. Internet censorship is the control or suppression of what can be accessed, published, or viewed on the internet.
In Brandon Chu’s satirical writing, he critiques the flaws of the election process. While he addresses a serious problem that has been on the rise since the 2016 election, there is a humorous tone. Chu’s lighthearted approach allows people to recognize the problems in the election process and prevents them from becoming offended. As William Thrall states, Chu “is conscious of the frailty of institutions of man’s devising and attempts through laughter not so much to tear them down as to inspire a remodeling” (William Thrall et al). Chu discusses people’s behavior on social media in the context of the election. People often share their political beliefs on various platforms of social media for two reasons: attention and to impose their views
In United States politics, it is evident that media helps persuade or dissuade peoples’ perceptions of those who run for public offices. Traditionally, news media cohere to a baseline ideology or platform and cover news, politics, and stories by the beliefs of the chosen ideology. For instance, a very liberal news outlet could characterize a story about Bernie Sanders in a very appealing fashion while a very conservative news outlet could cover the same information negatively. Framing is how media and other groups organize and perceive events in daily society. Framing is an important tool that is used to bring people to a common similarity and ideology. Liberal and conservative news stations use framing to daily, either promoting the candidate
Beyond many people’s knowledge, the news is not always exclusively disclosing objective facts on events. Rather, the news platform utilize rhetoric to influence its audience’s interpretation on an event. More astonishingly, many people don’t recognize misinformation and thus allow the news platform to subtly force an opinion on their audience. An impressionable audience is the product of our media dependent culture; ultimately, media has the power to distribute biased information and strongly influence the public. However, the audience should bear the responsibility of rejecting the misinformation they are exposed to and to always question the credibility. In an attempt to improve our economy, President Trump attempts to repeal the
The greatest flaw with the media today is its incessant pandering in the attempt to garner popularity. This essay will explore how the media’s desperate pursuit of popularity negatively impacts its quality by examining the current state of cable news, information bubbles, and the media’s transformation of politics into sports.
It has already happened to 3 of my friends.” In both of their feeds, their friends are aligned with the same political leaning as they are, without people of the other side posting. However, to truly understand how toxic the concept of an echo chamber has on political discourse, we must look
The Echo Chamber Effect is helped by the social media algorithm that will show you posts that agree with your beliefs so you will spend more times on their site. For example, “On Twitter, for instance, people who tweet about politics tend to tweet primarily at and with people who belong to the same party, creating what one team of researchers called “pockets of political polarization.”” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12/16/you-might-think-trump-is-bad-but-unfriending-his-supporters-on-facebook-is-worse/?utm_term=.f03a3a7df113) This polarization is prevalent in the people that during the election unfriended Trump supporters. You are creating a digital wall to protect yourself from Trump just like how Trump wants to build a wall to protect the United States from
The purpose of this essay is to develop a further understanding of the impacts of social media in regards to the political debate. By looking at the topic of social media and the use rhetoric in response to politics in the 21st century, a deeper understanding of the issue can be established. Social media has become a primary source for the discussion of politics by the average citizen; whether through the sharing of articles, “memes”, advertisements or personal expository statements. As a result, large sums of information and ideas are spread rapidly to a wide variety of subjects. However, much of this information may not be accurate and could be misinterpreted. Consequently potentially misinformed citizens may not be able to make a properly
Many social media sites use actual censors in order to remove content deemed inappropriate (Sandvig 2015, p. 2). This raises important questions about power and power relations on social media, however what is perhaps a less obvious concern is the impact of the algorithms that determines which users see what content. Eli Pariser (2011) introduced the concept of “filter bubbles”, where platforms like Facebook shows only what it is believed the user wants to see. Consequently the user may not be shown anything oppositional or challenging to their world view. Presumably, this filtering is done with the aim of improving user experience in mind, rather than coming from a place of ill intentions, as seeing only what one wants to see should hypothetically create a more pleasant time on a social media platform. However, the filtering becomes especially problematic considering that social media is more and more becoming a primary source of news (Pariser 2011, p. 66 cited in Willson 2013, p. 218). The inextricability of the freedom of press and democracy (Karlekar & Becker 2014, p. 32) demonstrates that it is important for an individual to be privy to a range of perspectives. This matter is further complicated by the matter of user knowledge and consent. Often users are unaware that this filtering is happening, and in
Herumin, Wendy. Censorship on the Internet: From Filter to Freedom of Speech. New York. Print.