Catching up on my blogging:
The old digital divide was, of course, between affluent people who could afford the new technologies of personal/home computer and the internet and the ability and knowledge to actually use such technologies. Of course when technologies are brand new they are going to be more expensive and less-widely accessible. Now that this is not the case (anyone can buy a desktop computer for less than $200 and there are wi-fi hot spots everywhere), the divide has shifted. People have the opportunity to be exposed to all sorts of information that they would not have easy access to even five years ago. You can know what is happening in Egypt and Japan from the comfort of your living room. People can explore different points of view and try to understand different opinions. However, because of the technologies of such companies as Google, people are being fed information tailor-made specifically for them.
Based on search trends, Google produces sites that would seem pleasing to the user. Other than the total creep factor, that Google software is essentially spying on our every Google move, some may argue that this type of filtering is hurting democracy. People are not talking with each other. Republicans are becoming more staunchly republican, and Democrats are entrenched in their ideals more than ever. Of course, it is only natural to gravitate toward like-minded people as oneself. Just like in high school, your clique or niche (online or offline) is going to be made up of the same type of people as you (same general socio-economic class, similar interests/hobbies, etc.). So why would online politics be any different? I have no idea. And it is not just online either. There are partisan television and radio shows as well.
If the discourse is not taking place in the chat rooms, where is it taking place? I really don't think it is. People feel uncomfortable talking about politics with those who are not like-minded. They feel vulnerable and unsafe. So they are more likely to stick with people they know won't shake their political foundation to the core. Shows like Crossfire (though no longer on air) do very little to fix the issue. If people are talking, it is most likely behind closed doors, one on one - an earnest discussion to discover their true political beliefs. But I do think this is probably rare. People don't want to question their beliefs. It is too scary to take the Cartesian route and question everything. So often times people do the exact opposite and question nothing.
I feel the same way about people questioning nothing, rather than everything, in order to stay in their comfort zone. It is our human nature to look for people who speak like us, look like us, and behave like us. However, for the internet to be as beneficial and useful as it claims to be, it should strive to make us change these ways. The internet is one of the few spaces where we can be anonymous, but that quality is useless with data customization. We just won't feel the need to be anonymous because we are not shy to express our beliefs with people like us. I feel that the only way to make us more open-minded is to be challenged via the internet and be forced to see what we don't necessarily want to see. Then, we will have no choice than to question everything.
ReplyDeleteWhy is "choice" no longer an option here? If I have to put up with opposing viewpoint every day, why can't I choose to have them blocked out at home? Would you like it if you could no longer block annoying or creepy people from your cell phone because it "hurts interpersonal communication?"
ReplyDeleteLook, I get it, we're all starry-eyed over what the internet can do and how it can make us interact with people we don't like (I DO. NOT. WANT. TO.), and how that can help democracy, but you're making an equal infringement on our freedoms the moment you choose to revoke the option to block that which you do not like.
Hey Katie- I came across this article that might seem useful.
ReplyDeletehttp://mashable.com/2011/04/06/foursquare-https/
Nemo - I completely agree. We naturally gravitate towards like-minded people. Why is there necessarily something wrong with doing so? People may choose to seek out people with different ideologies, but if I choose not to, does it really mean that I am, by default, narrow-minded and scared of different opinions. No. It is the fact of having the freedom to find those different opinions at anytime that makes the internet so wonderful (even if I do not regularly utilize this ability).
ReplyDelete