The Impact of the Internet

Dear Friends,

I have written two posts lately that discussed how to keep the internet open on an equal basis to all.  In his column today in The New York Times David Brooks discusses some recent research that confirms for me the importance of an equal opportunity internet (here).  Mr. Brooks first discusses some work by Cass Sunstein that suggested that the internet was undermining the traditional American discourse where people are confronted with a full range of views.  The argument is that the internet permits people to select information that they take in from sources that fit with their preconceived notions.  Conservatives can watch Fox News and liberals can watch MSNBC.  When liberals only interact with liberals, they become more liberal.  When conservatives only interact with conservatives, they become more conservative.

But Mr. Brooks cites some new research by Matthew Gentzkow and Jesse M. Shapiro.  This research suggests, for example that

People who spend a lot of time on Glenn Beck’s Web site are more likely to visit The New York Times’s Web site than average Internet users. People who spend time on the most liberal sites are more likely to go to foxnews.com than average Internet users. Even white supremacists and neo-Nazis travel far and wide across the Web.

I find it interesting.  Rather than try to summarize Mr. Brooks' conclusions, I will print below the last three paragraphs of his column.  It is a good column, you might want to read it.

Gentzkow and Shapiro found that the Internet is actually more ideologically integrated than old-fashioned forms of face-to-face association — like meeting people at work, at church or through community groups. You’re more likely to overlap with political opponents online than in your own neighborhood.
This study suggests that Internet users are a bunch of ideological Jack Kerouacs. They’re not burrowing down into comforting nests. They’re cruising far and wide looking for adventure, information, combat and arousal. This does not mean they are not polarized. Looking at a site says nothing about how you process it or the character of attention you bring to it. It could be people spend a lot of time at their home sites and then go off on forays looking for things to hate. But it probably does mean they are not insecure and they are not sheltered.
If this study is correct, the Internet will not produce a cocooned public square, but a free-wheeling multilayered Mad Max public square. The study also suggests that if there is increased polarization (and there is), it’s probably not the Internet that’s causing it.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal