Filter Bubbles & Democracy
During the early days of Web 2.0, the Internet’s affordances were considered a valuable tool for democracy, opening the gate for citizens to by-pass established media gatekeepers (Pariser 2011) allowing them to connect and share their opinions with one another, free from regulation. While the Internet has certainly given voice to many and a public sphere has formed, newer data collecting technologies may be stifling democracy.
Internet corporations such as Google, Facebook, MSN etc., now study our personal data through our browser cookies and Internet usage (Pariser 2011). This information is then analysed and processed through an algorithm, resulting in automatic online suggestions, specifically curated to what the Internet thinks we want to see (Haim et. al 2018). While this allows us to filter through the vast amount of information available on the web and have a more seamless and personal online experience (Haim et. al 2018), this can result in limited access to information. This process has been termed ‘filter bubbles’ (Haim et. al 2018), in where an individual’s online experience is limited to the bubble of information created for them by these Internet algorithms and at the same time filtering out seemingly irrelevant information.
What does this mean for democracy? As we continue to see, the Internet is increasingly becoming the preference for news consumption, especially for younger people (University of Canberra 2017). Filter bubbles have the potential to prevent different perspectives from ever reaching an individual, which can limit their world-view. This has adverse effects on our ability for proper civic engagement. The political online discussions and information we are presented with, and are presenting to others through content sharing, can be unknowingly tainted with bias because we are only offered content aligned to our own beliefs and ideas. For democracy to truly thrive online, mass-media must present a balance of news, providing diverse content which will enable citizens to make well-informed, rational decisions (Haim et. al 2018).
Eli Pariser, executive of the viral media production company ‘Upworthy’, suggests that gate-keeping, which is the control and dissemination of information and news to the public, has moved away from media professionals to these algorithmic systems (Ted 2011). While there have been criticisms in the past of how media gate-keepers regulated news to the point of marginalising voices in the community, Pariser argues that at least the regulation of information was done in an ethical way compared to the current algorithms we are seeing today (Ted 2011). The solution then rests on corporations to revise these systems, approaching data collection and algorithms in a humanistic way. By allowing different points of view to enter our ‘bubbles’ and challenge our own ideas, we are able to learn and grow as individuals and thus be empowered to truly partake in a democratic society.
To sum everything up, have a look at Eli Pariser’s Ted talk below:
Haim, M Graefe, A & Hans-Bernd B 2018, ‘Burst of the Filter Bubble?’, Digital Journalism, vol. 6, 3, pp 330-343.
Pariser, E 2011, The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you, Viking, London.
Ted, Beware online “filter bubbles”, 2 May 2011, viewed 6th May 2018, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8ofWFx525s&feature=youtu.be>.
University of Canberra 2017, Digital News Report: Australia 2017, APO, viewed 7 May 2018, <http://apo.org.au/system/files/95161/apo-nid95161-346236.pdf>.
