w2 Flashcards
public sphere
a realm of our social life in which such a thing as public opinion can be formed, enabled the emergence of enlightened democracy
- Habermas
echo chambers
is an environment where people are only exposed to information or opinions that reinforce their existing beliefs, leading to limited exposure to diverse viewpoints. This often occurs in social media or media networks.
how can we achieve depolarisation
forcing the groups to work together
what is the fall of the public sphere
new media, where we are just feed information instead of actively participating in it
why is internet a virtual public sphere
bcs social media allows for communicative spaces in society that permit the circulation of information, ideas, debates, ideally in an unfettered manner
The medium is the message
what is mean by that
the medium through which we choose to communicate holds as much, if not more, value than the message itself.
A political message is neceseraly a media message and the message is conveyed through the specific language of the media
Why social media isnt a public sphere
social media isnt a public sphere because it allows for fragmetation - echo chamber
what is the isolation paradigm/echo chamber paradigm
its a paradigm of polarization resarch - isolation leads to radicatisation which in turn increases polarization
characterized by:
a) Politics focused on opinions and arguments
b) Polarization is based on the divergence of opinions
c) Object of study are the structures of interaction
far right echo chambers - how are users transformed (3) by engaging with the comunity,
- Identity - Pick up internal lingo used as cultural capital in the community, Shifts in discursive markers of identity
- Worldview - The community processes events through collective meaningmaking, ribal epistemology: “Good for our side” and “true” blur into one.
- Emotions - Transform emotions into the emotional energy that fuel movement action, Stormfront provided “emotional group therapy”: verbalization that transform emotions
what is the structure of interaction on twitter
retweets are like echochambers but mentions are not
t or f
social media polarizes us by isolating us from oppsoing views
no, it polarizes us by confluctual interaction with opposing partisans
we are thrown into partican war and forced to rake a side
social media and Goffman
social media as a stage where we engage in self presentation
we create our identities through self presentation
Robbers cave experiment in short
22 boys split into 2 groups in order to create polarization
stage 1 - isolation, 2 groups were created and kept seperated in order for each group to form internal noerms and group culture, each had a name …
stage 2 - conflict, interaction of groups through competition of groups.
- isolation + conflict
folk vs realist theory of democracy
Rational arguments - policy position - choice of party
“Realist theory of democracy”:
Partisan identity - policy positions - rational arguments
our arguments grow from our political identity
conflict paradigm of polarization
conflict increases group beloinging which increases conflict….
polarisation comes from intergroup conflict
why dont public sphere nor echo chambers adequtely describe social media
social media interactions often mix elements of both. The public sphere suggests rational, open debate, but social media tends to be conflict-driven and polarized, lacking the ideal of civil discourse. On the other hand, the “echo chamber” model implies isolation from opposing views, but research shows that people are frequently exposed to conflicting opinions online—though these interactions often lead to more conflict rather than moderationbecause social media is more than opinons
Affective spillover
refers to the phenomenon where emotions and attitudes rooted in political partisanship extend beyond the political sphere and influence behavior in non-political domains. Essentially, the negative feelings and animosity generated by political polarization (affective polarization) begin to affect how individuals interact in everyday life.
Social homophily
Social homophily is the tendency for people to form connections and relationships with others who are similar to themselves in terms of characteristics like beliefs, values, demographics, or social status. In politics, this means individuals often associate with those who share their political views, reinforcing like-minded networks and contributing to polarization.
what are the origins and causes of polarization
Partisan social identity: People increasingly see their political party as part of their core identity, viewing opposing parties as out-groups.
Media influence: Partisan media and political campaigns amplify divisions by emphasizing negative portrayals of the opposing side.
Ideological sorting: People align their political views more consistently with their party, reinforcing divisions.
Social homophily: Individuals tend to associate with like-minded people, reducing exposure to diverse viewpoints.
Reinforced social identities: Race, religion, and other social factors increasingly align with political affiliation, deepening divides.
how to decrease affective polarization (2)
- correcting misperceptions about party supporters - making partisants realize they are more alike than they think
- shift the salience away from partisan identity toward a common identity so from democrat vs republican to american
Criticism of echo chamber
- Many studies on mainstream platforms do not find homogeneous clusters
- When we are exposed to disagreement, we don’t actually moderate - exposure todisagreement might make polarization worse
how are far right echochambers conected to social media
Online spaces also create communities with a sense of collective self, a way of understanding the world, and emotionally energized to act.
far-right echo chambers on social media isolate users, reinforcing extreme views and radicalizing them through shared, one-sided content and group identity
trigger buble
- is an agent-based model showing alternative mechanism, to the echo chamber
- Conflict is the mechanism for social media polarization
- conflict with opposing views, rather than isolation, drives polarization. Users are exposed to and engage in contentious interactions with opposing partisans, intensifying divisions and forcing them to take sides
bridging algorithm
platform that boosts content with bipartizan appeal
- in the study levels of toxicity were compaired between 1 users only interacting with their friends, 2 posts ranked on the N of likes and comments and 3 posts were ranked based on likes from the opposite party - least toxic
Why do Republicans become more conservative when exposed to liberal views, while Democrats show only a slight change when exposed to conservative views?
The study suggests that Republicans might be more prone to backfire effects, where exposure to opposing views strengthens their original beliefs. This could be linked to psychological factors where conservatives value tradition and certainty, making them more resistant to opposing viewpoints. Liberals, who tend to be more open to change, may be less affected by conservative messaging, though the slight liberal shift was not statistically significant.
How do social media platforms’ echo chambers influence political polarization?
Social media platforms tend to create “echo chambers” where individuals primarily engage with content that reinforces their existing beliefs. The study suggests that even when people are exposed to opposing views, rather than reducing polarization, these platforms can deepen ideological divides due to the nature of how individuals counter-argue conflicting information.
What mechanisms drive the backfire effect observed among Republicans in this study?
The backfire effect occurs when individuals, upon exposure to opposing viewpoints, double down on their preexisting beliefs. This may happen due to motivated reasoning, where people process information in a biased manner, seeking to protect their identity and beliefs.
How does affective polarization differ from ideological polarization, and why is it considered a growing concern?
- affective polarization refers to the dislike between members of opposing political parties,
- ideological polarization is based on differences in policy views.
- Affective polarization is concerning because it spills over into non-political areas, leading to divisions in social relationships, hiring practices, and even economic behaviors, regardless of ideological alignment on specific issues.
What role do media and political campaigns play in amplifying affective polarization?
Media, particularly partisan news outlets, and political campaigns amplify affective polarization by consistently framing the opposing party in negative terms. Partisan media often emphasize scandals or portray out-party members as extreme, which heightens animosity.
