#Listen to this post
Nowadays, news and information are no longer generated solely through traditional news sources such as radio, television or the newspaper, but increasingly via the Internet. By the emergence of social media platforms, we can consume news first-hand, without gatekeepers, meaning well trained journalists, and without paying for it. Social media no longer serves us purely for entertainment, it influences and shapes our mindset, and thus our opinions, in various areas of life. This blog article will explore how echo chambers and filter bubbles on social media platforms influence and shape individual perspectives, affect perceptions of reality, and contribute to social polarisation in the context of digital activism.
Social Media as a news source
Social media represents a very different type of information source than traditional broadcast or print media, and it is unclear how people evaluate the vast amount of news they encounter on social media. Understanding the factors that influence people’s trust in news has long been important to scholars and the media. Given the growing concern about the spread of fake news on social media online, it’s particularly interesting to find out how people are influenced in forming their opinions and what phenomena are emerging on social media in this regard. In my first blog post I dealt with the topic of how social media can promote social justice, shedding light at the importance of hashtag activism. In this post, I aim to explain phenomena such as filter bubbles and echo chambers, and their influence on digital activism. But first, let’s take a look at a few facts about the use of social media as a news source and as an opportunity to create communities for (digital) activism.
According to the digital news report published by the Reuters Institute in June 2023, the most striking findings emerge in the changing nature of social media, characterised in part by declining interaction with traditional networks such as Facebook and the rise of TikTok and a number of other video-driven networks. Yet despite the increasing channel fragmentation, and despite evidence that public organizing via misinformation and algorithms has reached near record highs, reliance on these intermediaries continues to grow. The data shows more clearly than ever that this change is strongly influenced by the habits of the youngest generations, who grew up with social media and who today often pay more attention to influencers, celebrities or journalists, even when it comes to social news (Newman, 2023).
The figure shows that the trend is clearly moving away from official news websites and towards social media platforms as sources of information. Thailand (64%), the Philippines (53%) and Chile (52%) are the leaders when it comes to consuming news on social media platforms. Finland, Norway and Denmark, on the other hand, bring up the rear with only 13, 12 and 18 percent respectively (Newman, 2023). 4.76 billion people worldwide use social media and the younger generation in particular is spending more and more time online (Kemp, 2023).
,,In the UK 41% of 18–24s say social media is now their main source of news, up from 18% in 2015 (43% across markets).’’
(Newman, 2023)
The result is that traditional news consumption is declining while digital consumption is continually increasing. But how great is the truth of news and information we find in social networks?
After all, many of us have heard that Hilary Clinton and her team ran a child pornography ring in the back rooms of a pizzeria in Washington D.C. (Wendling, 2016), or that Pope Francis endorsed former presidential candidate Donald Trump (Pullella, 2018). These are just two examples of fake news that has spread rapidly via social media and, as can be seen in the Pizzagate case, there are people who believe this news. At first glance, it seems obvious to attribute the problems caused by conspiracy theories and misinformation to the use of social media. However, scientific studies find no evidence that belief in fake news is actually growing. Social media users are more open to conspiracy theories, especially when they are promoted by celebrities, but the beliefs of the general public are remarkably stable. Fake news are becoming more visible, but not more effective (Uscinski, 2022).
Some countries perceive social networks as a threat, leading to the possibility of censorship and restrictions imposed by governments and social media companies. Several regimes such as China, Iran and North Korea have systematically hindered or even banned the use of social networking websites in their country (Shirky, 2011). Some governments use internet police to control the type of information their citizens use and make publicly available.
In addition to the facts about the use of social media and the (fake) news that we come across, many communities have been founded in recent years with people who share similar interests and strive for the same aspirations. These virtual communities transcend physical boundaries and serve as a means for translocal and transnational community building for movements and activists.
Confirmation bias amplified: Echo Chambers and Filter Bubbles
When it comes to shaping our perspectives, echo chambers and filter bubbles are two meaningful terms. They are potent metaphors that capture the prevailing concern among the public that social media usage might restrict the information users come across online, ultimately hindering the promotion of freely flowing information. The concern is that social media algorithms, coupled with the inclination to engage with those who share similar views, create an environment that predominantly presents users with content that aligns with their opinions, potentially excluding a broader range of perspectives that could challenge those opinions (Kitchens et al., 2020).
The concept of the “echo chamber”, introduced and popularised by legal scholar Cass Sunstein in a series of books since the early 2000s, is explicitly based on Nicholas Negroponte’s vision of the newspaper tailored to your own interests ,,Daily Me’’ from the mid-1990s: a Web 2.0-enabled, personalised news portal that offers only the news relevant to the user’s known interests, and therefore differs significantly from user to user. While Negroponte’s own vision of this service was largely positive, Sunstein took a much more dystopian view and saw ,,Daily Me’’ and similar services as fragmenting and atomizing society (Bruns, 2022). Jamieson and Capella (2008, p.76) describe an Echo Chamber as
,, (…) a bounded, enclosed media space that has the potential to both magnify the messages delivered within it and insulate them from rebuttal.’’
(Jamieson & Capella, 2008, p.76)
In 2011, American author Eli Pariser first described the “filter bubble” phenomenon. He envisions a “personal information universe” created for all users that is shaped by personalized filters created by algorithms that keep track of what we click on. These algorithmic filters are indeed necessary, as search engines or social networks, due to the vast amount of data, cannot display all the information available. Therefore, information gets selected and sorted. Consequently, this data is not the same for everyone, but personalized to each user (Pariser, 2011). Similar to real life, many users on social networks are friends with or follow people who have similar views, attitudes or interests. The content posted therefore all contains a very similar basic attitude and it can certainly give the impression that your own point of view is represented by the whole world, which can prevent you from finding new ideas and perspectives online. This promotes polarization of issues and bypasses educational or political measures commonly shared on social media.
The phenomenon of ,,Confirmation Bias’’ is also relevant in the context of echo chambers and filter bubbles. It states that people rarely act rationally and often act without careful consideration. Pre-existing beliefs usually determine how people react to news – what confirms one’s own opinion is more credible than contrary information. The origin of confirmation bias, also known as confirmation error, lies in the fact that people tend to be selective in their approach to new information they receive. These people consider information that corresponds to their opinions and thus feel confirmed in their assumptions. Fake news that corresponds to their own world view is therefore more credible for these people (Appel, 2020: 16f). When processing new information, it is also possible that only certain knowledge units are combined in our memory to logically support the desired conclusion (Kunda, 1990).
The confirmation bias should not be confused with the ,,Illusionary Truth’’ effect. It states that we are more likely to believe information that we already know or are familiar with. If we have heard about a certain piece of (false) news and come into contact with it again, it does not seem untrue to us at first. Empirical research has shown that this is precisely the case. The illusory truth effect often appears in context with fact checks. The repetition of “fake news” in a fact check, in which the statement of the news is actually to be revised, increased the perceived truth content of false information (Pennycook et al., 2018).
What do echo chambers and filter bubbles mean for digital activism?
Through social media, activists are having an increasing influence on media, public opinion and, it stands to reason, political decisions. It may be one way to advocate for social justice for underserved or marginalised communities. Social Media provides us with a wealth of information, often firsthand, which opens our eyes to social and political issues. Recent events and movements are presented visibly, and discussions usually take place in the comments. Depending on which chamber or bubble one finds themselves in, conformity is encouraged.
,,For its proponents, social media is a force for change, which can challenge entrenched hierarchies, redistribute power, democratise information, support mass mobilisation and contribute to the building of global movements.’’
(McCabe & Harris, 2021).
Based on Freire’s concept of critical consciousness, social media can provide a platform that fosters the development of critical consciousness, which in turn can lead to social engagement and ultimately social justice. Critical consciousness existed before the advent of social media and not all social media users develop such consciousness. Nevertheless, social media can have an impact on the development of critical and social awareness, but it should be noted that there has been limited scientific research on the impact of social media on the perception of social issues (Al’Uqdah et al., 2019). A significant portion of the public is sceptical about the algorithms used to determine what they see on search engines, social media, and other platforms. Less than one-third (30%) believe that curating news based on their past consumption is an effective way to stay informed. Even if there are no studies yet that really prove that people today actually live in denser filter bubbles or are encouraged to form echo chambers due to the effect of algorithms, it is clear that our opinions could be manipulated with the help of these algorithms (Newman, 2023).
One of the first movements to be organised digitally and to demonstrate the possible connection between social media and social consciousness was the “Green Movement” in Iran in 2009 and 2010. Activists used email, blogs and Twitter lists to organise protests and provide updates to participants. Journalists then referred to the protests as the “Twitter Revolution” (Sandoval-Almazan & Ramon Gil-Garcia, 2014). Not too long ago, in 2020, we witnessed the resurgence of “Black Lives Matter,” a movement to end police violence which has created a huge wave around the world and is another example of the connection between social media and social consciousness. The movement began on social media in 2013 with the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter, made its way into the mainstream press and eventually to the forefront of American politics (Anderson & Hitlin, 2016). Movement participants emphasise the importance of social media in pursuing their goal (Freelon, McIlwain, & Clark, 2016; Stephen, 2015).
A growingly discussed trend in digital activism is slacktivism or clicktivism. These are relatively low-commitment participants, often derided as “feel-good activists” or “slacktivists”. However, they hold significant value within the collective. By expanding the audience, the messages sent by the engaged minority can amplify the core voices and actions, providing a means for a larger number of online citizens to receive news and information about the movement. Through these “peripheral actors,” as Barbera et al. call them, core activists’ messages would not enjoy the reach and amplification (Barbera et al., 2015). The danger may be that these “peripheral actors” reinforce existing beliefs and tend to only be exposed to opinions and information that already correspond to their existing beliefs, which in turn reinforces prejudices and a lack of diversity in thinking can lead (Sunstein, 2017). The risk of radicalization also plays a significant role, since echo chambers may reinforce extremist views and promote unhealthy group dynamics, which can lead to the promotion of radical views regarding activism (Bakshy et al. 2015).
Conclusion
The era when only media houses broadcasted information and only consumers received it is over. In general, social media has evolved beyond its original purpose of connecting people and improving communication, it has developed as a mechanism that has a significant social and cultural impact on society. The use of social media contributes to the creation, organisation and strengthening of political and social action movements worldwide. The formation of echo chambers can on the one hand lead to audience polarisation, while on the other hand, it can inspire determination and passion. In a negative sense, hatred and agitation or even violence can occur. When using social media to initiate or promote movements, positive and negative aspects must be carefully considered while one should contemplate consciously stepping out of the bubble and immersing themselves in other filter bubbles, comparing information and critically questioning it.
As always, I’m very much looking forward to the exchange with you all!
References
Al’Uqdah, S., Jenkins, K., Ajaa, N. (2019). Empowering Communities through Social Media. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 32:2, p. 137-149. DOI: 10.1080/09515070.2017.1407747
Anderson, M., & Hitlin, P. (2016). The hashtag #BlackLivesMatter emerges: Social activism on Twitter. The Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2016/08/15/the-hashtag-blacklivesmatter-emerges-social-activism-on-twitter/ on November 3rd 2023.
Appel, M. (2020). Die Psychologie des Postfaktischen: Über Fake News, ,,Lügenpresse’’, Clickbait und Co. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, p.16f.
Bakshy, E., Messing, S., Adamic, L. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science 348,p. 1130-1132. DOI:10.1126/science.aaa1160
Barbera, P., Wang, N., Bonneau, R., Jost, J., Nagler, J., Tucker, J., Gonzalez Ballon,S. (2015). The Critical Periphery in the Growth of Social Protests. Retrieved from https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0143611 on November 4th 2023.
Bruns, A. (2022). Echo Chambers? Filter Bubbles? The misleading metaphors that obscure the real problem. In: Hate Speech and Polarisation in participatory society Edited by Perez-Escolar, M. & Noguera-Vivo J., (2020). Oxfordshire: Routledge, p.34. Retrieved from https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/52790/1/9781000462845.pdf#page=60 on October 28th 2023.
Freelon, D., McIlwain, C., & Clark, M. D. (2016). Beyond the hashtags: #Blacklivesmatter, #Ferguson, and the online struggle for offline justice. Washington, DC: Center for Media and Social Impact, American University. Retrieved from https://cmsimpact.org/resource/beyond-hashtags-ferguson-blacklivesmatter-online-struggle-offline-justice/ on November 3rd 2023.
Jamieson, & Capella, (2008). Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 76.
Kitchens, B., Johnson, S., Gray, P. (2020): Understanding Echo Chambers and Filter Bubbles: the impact of Social Media on Diversification and partisan shifts in news consumption. Retrieved from: https://www.darden.virginia.edu/sites/default/files/inline-files/05_16371_RA_KitchensJohnsonGray%20Final_0.pdf on November 1st.
Kemp, S. (2023). Digital 2023: Global Overview Report. Retrieved from: https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2023-global-overview-report on October 22nd 2023.
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, p.108, 480–498.
McCabe, A. & Harris, K. (2021). Theorizing social media and activism: where is community development? Community Development Journal. Volume 56, Issue 2, p.318–337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsz024
Newman, N. (2023). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2023. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. United Kingdom. Retrieved from: https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2023/dnr-executive-summary on October 25th 2023.
Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: what the internet is hiding from you. New York: Penguin Press.
Pennycook, G., Cannon, T., & Rand, D. (2018). Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147, p. 1865–1880.
Pullella, P. (2018). Pope condemns “evil” of fake news and its use for political gain. Retrieved from: https://www.reuters.com/article/pope-fakenews/pope-condemns-evil-of-fake-news-and-its-use-for-political-gain-idINL8N1PJ2CZ on November 1st 2023.
Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Ramon Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2014). Towards cyberactivism 2.0? Understanding the use of social media and other information technologies for political activism and social movements. Government Information Quarterly, 31, p. 365–378. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.10.016
Shirky, C. (2011). The political power of social media: Technology, the public sphere, and political change. Foreign Affairs. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/25800379 on November 3rd 2023.
Sunstein, C. (2017). #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton University Press. Retrieved from https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691175515/republic on November 4th 2023.
Uscinski, J. (2022). Dossier Fake News: Soziale Medien sind nicht das Problem. Retrieved from: https://www.derpragmaticus.com/r/verschwoerungstheorien on October 27th 2023.
Wendling, M. (2016). The saga of ‘Pizzagate’: The fake story that shows how conspiracy theories spread. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-38156985 on October 27th 2023.
Header Image via Canva
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Reflection
Last but not least, I would like to share my thoughts and experience about this blogging project, which was exceedingly enriching on many levels. In the past, I’ve already had the opportunity to be in charge of a company blog and fill it with theoretical input. However, I wasn’t responsible for the technical aspects, which is why I was very motivated to delve deeper into the structure of the blog and try out different designs and features for this project. For a smooth start, I personally found the tutorial from class and other sources on the internet particularly helpful. The final design and the color combination are the result of many attempts to combine designs, slogans and colors. According to my colleagues, they liked the result and apparently so did the audience, and I can confidently say that blogging encourages creativity and demands solution-oriented action. The brainstorming process and the joint search for solutions as a team was very enriching and I, as a person who enjoys working in a diverse team with people who are educated in different areas, was able to blossom and broaden my own horizons.
It was also interesting to experience that setting up a blog requires quite a lot of time and maintenance, from setting up the design, planning and realizing the initial blog posts, to creating the social media channels, before one can start noticing a certain amount of traffic on the blog. After a few blog posts were published, it didn’t take long for the engagements, meaning comments and likes on the blog and our social media channels, to start trickling in. Networking is driven by blogging and it’s interesting for my own horizons to see what others think about the topics.
In the end, it was enriching to reflect on the communication plan that we presented at the beginning of the period. All in all, the group project, which combined theory and practice in equal measure, was a wonderful experience and at the same time an opportunity to delve deeper into topics that we are personally highly interested in and share them with the community we had created. Last but not least, it would have been exciting to see how the engagement on the blog and social media channels would have developed if the project had run over a longer period of time, such as an entire semester.
Don’t want to read? Listen to this post here:
