politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The problem is that democratically driven content feeds tend to favor the predominant idea only. The very mechanism of "likes" or "upvotes" is literally what creates the echo chamber.
You ever start to write a comment and then change the way you're articulating yourself, or decide not to post it altogether because it requires nuance and more explanation than you're willing to give? That's the force of an echo chamber, it creates homogeneity.
Basically any content platform with voting systems creates content silos.
Mastodon gets the same accusation as well and there's no up voting or algorithm at play. What does seem true is that each environment is representative of those who participate. Reddit is 20+% trolls and bad faith for any major sub and conversations reflect that.
In general, my primary complaint to the echo chamber argument is that if everywhere you go, all you can find are echo chambers, then maybe they're not echo chambers and actually reflecting the population?
Doesn't providing nuance counter the homogeneity? Also what's the alternative? Algorithmically promotes content? But those create even more of an echo chamber as you only see what the algo thinks you'll personally engage with.
I guess meeting in person might be better - but even then your neighborhood is probably rather classist so idk how much you'd end up not in an echo chamber either :/
But it doesn’t really matter. As long as one uses multiple apps/forums, I.e different echo chambers, and touches grass in Wild West spaces from time to time, like reality, it’s all fine.
I think the effect of echo chambers is just altogether overblown, and also the natural inclination for a human to just stay in one place, not being curious to peek behind other curtains from time to time. The latter is one of the key traits of our species, we are just simply too curious to ever be completely taken by echo chambers. The individuals with less curiosity and more inclination to stay in place, not change anything, may have this problem more due to those traits. I.e. conservatives.
As long as ones curious and doesn’t explicitly communicate with other humans in one dedicated space, it’s all fine. It’s actively harmful to our psyche to be exposed to something like 4chan or Tate brothers academy just for the sake of not being in an echo chamber.
Nuance only sometimes counters the homogeneity, I think. People tend to respond highly emotionally when things are anonymous, no matter how strucured the content is. That's why rage bait dominates our headlines! I don't know. I certainly dont know a better approach. I haven't really thought about it tbh. The modus operandi felt like it worked until it didn't. Now look at us.
What's "best for most" isn't ever really gonna be best. But I have no idea how we best go about curating a digital society that is both democratic and not an echo chamber.
Also places like reddit will have subs that will ban you for the slightest nuance, or misconstrued comment