"Is the Internet Polarizing U.S. Political Dialogue?" (FreeRepublic mentioned)

Annenberg Journalism School, USC ^ | April 23, 04 | Mark Glaser

[churchillbuff]

Mark Glaser Posted: 2004-04-22 ...While people on the left and right can turn beet-red with anger on TV shows such as ABC's "This Week," CNN's "Crossfire" or Fox's "Hannity & Colmes," the Internet provides innumerable forums and political sites so anyone can fire off a torrent of rhetorical brickbats. The Web is the birthplace of "flamers" and "trolls," people who launch no-holds-barred attacks on others with opposing views.

...[ship]...But despite the rise of so much partisan noise, it's hard to say without a doubt that we're living in the most divisive time, or that the Net is to blame. Research in the area is relatively sketchy, and the Net still provides a vast galaxy of diverse opinions and objective journalism.

In January, Pew Internet found that 67 percent of Americans prefer getting news from sources that don't have a political point of view, while 25 percent prefer news sources that share their point of view. Scott Keeter, associate director for the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, told me that people who use the Net are even less likely to say they want news from sources with their viewpoint. ...[snip]Other researchers believe that ideological journalism is just another way to serve a niche audience. Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, says that the recent State of the News Media 2004 report showed a demand for targeted media in general, and not just ideological media.

"We are in an on-demand world," Rosenstiel said via e-mail. "People want what they want when they want it. They don't want a one-size-fits-all news. For those who want to make their niche a conservative audience, that has given them a comfortable spot. ..."The danger of echo chambers

While news futurists have dreamed of the day people could create their "Daily Me" -- a newspaper or Web site with only the news they want (and agree with) -- one prominent political thinker believes this could lead to a closed-minded society and the eventual ruin of democracy. ...[snip]Sunstein believes that like-minded people discussing an issue amongst themselves tend to move to more extreme viewpoints. ...[snip]In "Republic.com," Sunstein even suggested that the government might have to step in and force Web sites to link to opposing opinions.

The book was originally published in 2001, but Sunstein recently told me he's softened his view on government regulation. "I didn't say that such regulation is necessary; only that it's worth considering," he said via e-mail. "I'm not sure I still think so ... The major point I'd emphasize is the risk that when like-minded people speak mostly to one another, there's more division and polarization and less mutual understanding. This is a serious problem for American democracy. Lots of options are good, but it's not so good if people sort themselves into echo chambers."

...[snip]The good side of partisan media

Of course, not everyone thinks ideological journalism is such a bad thing -- in moderation. Michael Cornfield, research director at the Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet at George Washington University, says that respectful debate has its place.

"I wouldn't be so quick to equate partisan/ideological with coarse and bad if I were you," he told me via e-mail. "There's nothing wrong with partisan dialogue, provided that it is grounded in facts, oriented to policymaking, and suffused with respect. True, some of the online dialogue doesn't meet those standards. But we can criticize, and click elsewhere." ...[snip]The Guerrilla News Network fancies itself an antiestablishment, anti-corporate Web site with music-fueled political videos. Most of its work has been critical of George W. Bush, but its top editors say GNN wants to take on powerful Democrats and Republicans. Executive editor Anthony Lappé says the site's forums are much more open to opposing viewpoints than partisan forums such as Free Republic or Democratic Underground. Creative director Stephen Marshall says GNN hopes to give more space to conservative voices in the future Related Links ABC News: "This Week" Air America Radio AlterNet Bill Powers: On the Media CJR's Campaign Desk CNN CNN: "Crossfire" Cass Sunstein's "Echo Chambers" essay (Acrobat file) Cass Sunstein's "Republic.com" Centrist Coalition Daily Kos Democratic Underground Fox News Channel Fox News Channel: "Hannity & Colmes" Free Republic Guerrilla News Network Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet Knight Ridder newspapers MSNBC National Journal National Public Radio National Review Online NewsMax Nielsen//NetRatings Pew Internet Project report Pew Research Center for the People & the Press Political Wire Project for Excellence in Journalism Rush Limbaugh Salon Slate State of the News Media 2004 TomPaine.com USA Today University of Chicago Department of Political Science University of Chicago Law School

Rick Heller, Centrist Coalition blogger

Jonah Goldberg, National Review Online editor at large

Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, founder of Daily Kos

Cass Sunstein, University of Chicago law and political science professor

Bill Powers, National Journal media columnist

Scott Keeter, associate director for the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

©1999-2004 Online Journalism Review. All rights reserved. Site design and development by Red Metro.

[Jeff Head]

Not polarizing...just finally revealing both sides where the major media squelched the conservative/constitutional/patriotic side for so long.

[murdoog]

The Web is the birthplace of "flamers" and "trolls," people who launch no-holds-barred attacks on others with opposing views.

Shows how much this guy knows. These terms AND the corresponding behaviors were around on USENET before anyone had heard of the World Wide Web. (And he has the definition of a troll wrong.)

[E. Pluribus Unum]

No, it is enabling voices to be heard that were ignored or discounted by traditional media in the past.

[The kings dead]

Sunstein even suggested that the government might have to step in and force Web sites to link to opposing opinions.

Ass. People who want opposing opinions can easily find them (has this clown never heard of search engines or portals?), and people who don't won't click the links.

[Semper Paratus]

Whatever happened to "Let a hundred flowers bloom!"?

[stuartcr]

Definitely polarizing...as the article said, people want what they want.

Soon, the only thing that will be believable, will be whatever one sees or hears themselves, in person. It's too easy to manipulate digital data.

[Onelifetogive]

Sunstein believes that like-minded people discussing an issue amongst themselves tend to move to more extreme viewpoints. ...[snip]In "Republic.com," Sunstein even suggested that the government might have to step in and force Web sites to link to opposing opinions.

But can they force me to "click" on the links.....

Oh yeah.....and how about that little "Freedom of Assembly" thing in the Constitution???

[sergeantdave]

What a moron. Note how this propagandist wants to weigh down web sites with alternative opposing views, yet he neatly sidesteps the idea of Dan Rather, et al, being forced to turn over their chairs on TV newscasts for alternative views.

This is more left wing tripe from Marxist dinosaurs who are losing the information war.

[risk]

In January, Pew Internet found that 67 percent of Americans prefer getting news from sources that don't have a political point of view...

Anyone journalist who isn't pro-American has a point of view. He's made his choice.

[Spiritus Gladius]

No, web opinion sites like FR and DU are safety valves. Without this desperately needed opportunity to vent, a certain small percentage of the population would be wearing aluminum foil hats and making bombs in their garages.

[muir_redwoods]

"Polarized" is a term used when the opposition objects to our unity. I may differ with other conservative/libertarian voices on some substantive issues but we know the importance of keeping the left out of power. We are polarized in the same way the colonists/revolutionaries were. Let's hope for the same success.

[OpusatFR]

"one prominent political thinker believes this could lead to a closed-minded society and the eventual ruin of democracy. ...[snip..."

Yup. The left has done that for decades by using the mainstream media to block out conservative views. Just about ruined the Republic until the advent of the internet.

[Don Corleone]

Free and open discourse is never polarizing...it is enlightening. The left is just scared S---less now that their one world socialist schemes are being uncovered.

[Piranha]

There's always a point of view.

Say you are a statehouse correspondent. There is a scandal in your state about illegal kickbacks by contractors to wives of certain officials in the administration. The Governor is giving a speech to the business council in the largest city in the state, and he doesn't mention the scandal. He is announcing a new industrial bond program to bring in a leading medical device manufacturing facility.

You have the chance to ask a question. Do you ask about the medical device facility (his agenda) or do you ask about the scandal that's on everyone's mind?

If you don't have the chance to ask a question, do you mention the scandal in your article? To you it hung over the entire event. Yet neither the governor nor any other speaker mentioned it.

There's always a point of view.

What the internet, through weblogs and Free Republic, does, is to give those who believe that their own viewpoint wasn't expressed, the opportunity to reframe the issues. Because FR, in particular, has such a broad base of informed readers, there is a very good level of factual accuracy, even as there is wholesale revision of the opinions and attitudes reflected in the news media being criticized.

This is the most exciting change in journalism in my lifetime.

[So Cal Rocket]

Ah... USC's Annenberg School of Journalism... Home to Professor Robert Scheer (admitted socialist/communist writer for the LA Times).

Every time the USC Alumni Association calls me for a donation, I tell them that I stopped giving when Scheer started "professing" at USC and I will give again once he leaves.

[Bahbah]

"We are polarized in the same way the colonists/revolutionaries were."

Very well put.

[subterfuge]

What I see are leftists/socialists probing and searching for a chink in the armor of the freedom of the internet. From Hitlary's thinly valed comments to this deep-thinker's tripe, they are just dying to get control of 'net.

[vandykelastone]

Yes, I get all my news from Free Republic. All of it. I can no longer bear to watch or hear the likes of Brokaw, Rather, and the rest pitching the news. Are the liberals now upset because someone else besides liberals can post and discuss news? Is their reign of terror over? It would seem so. TOUGH!

[Eastbound]

"Lots of options are good, but it's not so good if people sort themselves into echo chambers."

Yes, let's all wear grey hats and pretend absolute evil does not exist out there.