The Internet holds the potential to serve as a forum for a dynamic mix of well-supported point of views from all over the spectrum of politics, academics, or any area involving intellectual perspectives. The problem is that people seem to make a habit out of seeking articles and blogs written in a point of view with which they already agree. Extremely "liberal" environmentalists will gravitate towards environmentally focused blogs written in liberal point of views, "conservatives" will gravitate towards conservative articles and forums, and so on, much like how an avid technology fan might follow up on blogs covering the latest techs. Sure, it's not what they read exclusively, but it comprises the bulk of their consumption. When this starts occurring, readers will be encouraged to stubbornly back their own take on matters by seeking out those with identical opinions, and enter every discussion closed-minded with their minds made up beforehand. This is no way to develop informed assessments of any subject.
Last semester, I took an introductory public policy course where we were discouraged from formulating policy proposals phrased with a personally preferred solution decided beforehand. All the alternatives had to be seriously explored and considered before arriving at a recommendation of a policy approach. It may sound like obvious common sense, but we often find ourselves falling into that trap.
There was a recently linked article linked on a high-profile technology enthusiast blog, noting that Microsoft was researching and developing a news aggregator that would attempt to sort articles by political bias. While this is technologically interesting, it poses the risk of furthering the polarization in the political and intellectual sphere, and strengthening the mentality of shutting out the voice of the "other side", whatever that may be.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)