The Echo Chamber: John Boyne

Product Information

The role of interest leads us to demand, the final factor we will consider in this section. The main possible causal mechanism here is self-selection: that some people actively opt into echo chambers because they prefer news that aligns with and reinforces their pre-existing views (selective exposure to attitude-consistent information) or actively seek to avoid counter-attitudinal information (selective avoidance of cross-cutting exposure). Broadly, a number of studies find that while many people do engage in some degree of selective exposure, they do not necessarily engage in selective avoidance (Bos et al. 2016; Garrett 2009; 2013; Garrett and Stroud 2014; Jang 2014; Johnson et al.

The UK results from this study are broadly similar to a previous analysis, also based on survey data, that, using a more indirect measure of diversity of news use, found that around 10% in the UK said they almost never see political content on social media that they disagree with (Dubois and Blank 2018). a b c Nguyen, C. Thi (June 2020). "Echo Chambers and Epistemic Bubbles". Episteme. 17 (2): 141–161. doi: 10.1017/epi.2018.32. ISSN 1742-3600. S2CID 171520109.a b Bakshy, Eytan; Messing, Solomon; Adamic, Lada A. (5 June 2015). "Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook". Science. 348 (6239): 1130–1132. Bibcode: 2015Sci...348.1130B. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa1160. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 25953820. S2CID 206632821. echo-chamber noun - Definition, pictures, pronunciation and usage notes | Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary at OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com". www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com . Retrieved 25 April 2020. Beam, M. A., Hutchens, M. J., & Hmielowski, J. D. (2018). Facebook news and (de)polarization: Reinforcing spirals in the 2016 US election. Information, Communication & Society, 21(7), 940–958. Unver, H. Akin (2017). "Politics of Automation, Attention, and Engagement". Journal of International Affairs. 71 (1): 127–146. ISSN 0022-197X. JSTOR 26494368.

Dunn, A. G., Leask, J., Zhou, X., Mandl, K. D., & Coiera, E. (2015). Associations between exposure to and expression of negative opinions about human papillomavirus vaccines on social media: An observational study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 17(6), e144. Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment". Oxford University Press & Annenberg School for Communication . Retrieved 12 June 2020. Echo chamber dynamics in social media as a two-step process. The first is "seeding" in which malicious actors insert misinformation into the public sphere, and second is “echoing” when people circulate it as part of their beliefs and identity. [2] We discuss online echo chambers in the context of a set of related concerns around the possible links between the rise of the internet and various digital platforms (search engines, social media, messaging applications, news aggregators, etc.) and polarisation in our societies.

Brulle, R.J., Carmichael, J., & Jenkins, J. C. (2012). Shifting public opinion on climate change: An empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the U.S., 2002–2010. Climatic Change, 114(2), 169–188. Some of the issues we discuss – around echo chambers, polarisation, and inequality – for example, raise moral and political questions and sometimes capture serious societal challenges. Our purpose here is not to outline normative positions on these but to summarise the relevant evidence. This is important to keep in mind because analytical terms such as echo chambers and polarisation often have a negative ring, but their implications of course depend on the substantive nature of the information echoed or the issues that polarise opinion. Basic descriptive facts about media use ↑ In recent years, closed epistemic networks have increasingly been held responsible for the era of post-truth and fake news. [26] However, the media frequently conflates two distinct concepts of social epistemology: echo chambers and epistemic bubbles. [16] Social scientists examine a range of different kinds of polarisation of the public, including ideological polarisation, affective polarisation, and news audience polarisation. As with any attempt to measure a change over time, decisions about what time frame to consider will influence conclusions, and often, there is little consistent data allowing for rigorous longitudinal analysis.

a b c d e f Diaz Ruiz, Carlos; Nilsson, Tomas (2023). "Disinformation and Echo Chambers: How Disinformation Circulates in Social Media Through Identity-Driven Controversies". Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. 4 (1): 18–35. doi: 10.1177/07439156221103852. S2CID 248934562.Bos, L., Kruikemeier, S., & de Vreese, C. (2016). Nation binding: How public service broadcasting mitigates political selective exposure. PLOS ONE, 11(5). a b Geschke, Daniel; Lorenz, Jan; Holtz, Peter (2019). "The triple-filter bubble: Using agent-based modelling to test a meta-theoretical framework for the emergence of filter bubbles and echo chambers". British Journal of Social Psychology. 58 (1): 129–149. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12286. PMC 6585863. PMID 30311947. S2CID 52965994. Adams, J., Green, J., & Milazzo, C. (2012b). Who moves? Elite and mass-level depolarization in Britain, 1987–2001. Electoral Studies, 31(4), 643–655. Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh and his radio show were categorized as an echo chamber in the first empirical study concerning echo chambers by researchers Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Frank Capella in their 2008 book Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. [44] Mutz, Diana C. (March 2001). "Facilitating Communication across Lines of Political Difference: The Role of Mass Media". American Political Science Review. 95 (1): 97–114. doi: 10.1017/s0003055401000223. ISSN 0003-0554. S2CID 6185156.