American public life has become increasingly ideologically segregated as newspapers have given way to screens. But societies have experienced extremism and fragmentation without the assistance of Silicon Valley for centuries. And the polarization in the US began long ago, with the rise of 24-hour cable news. So just how responsible is the internet for today’s divisions? And are they really as bad as they seem?
In this Twitter map (below) of the US political landscape, accounts that follow one another are clustered together, and they are color-coded by the kinds of content they commonly share. At first glance, it might seem reassuring: although there are clear echo chambers, there is also an intertwined network of elected officials, the press, and political and policy professionals. There are extremes, but they are mediated through a robust middle.
Each circle is a Twitter account; its size represents the number of followers. Color reflects the kind of content.
There are multiple left/right groups, with the political parties closer to the center and anti-/pro-Trump groups at the extremes.
Each circle is a Twitter account; its size represents the number of followers. Color reflects the kind of content.
There are multiple left/right groups, with the political parties closer to the center and anti-/pro-Trump groups at the extremes.
Each circle is a Twitter account; its size represents the number of followers. Color reflects the kind of content.
There are multiple left/right groups, with the political parties closer to the center and anti-/pro-Trump groups at the extremes.
However, as the following diagrams will show, the middle is a lot weaker than it looks, and this makes public discourse vulnerable both to extremists at home and to manipulation by outside actors such as Russia.
Source: This is What Filter Bubbles Actually Look Like | MIT Technology Review