"Being exposed to other viewpoints drives polarization because the “other viewpoints” that algorithms are most likely to float to the tops of our feeds are demeaning toward our viewpoints. This means that if a pro-life Twitter user wanted to see pro-choice Twitter content, they are more likely to see a tweet that says, “Pro-life people hate women,” than they are, “Pro-choice rights are women’s rights!”"
This is the issue I'm seeing, is that we're not even really seeing "the other side," but like you said, what Twitter or Facebook or whatever wants us to see... The worst version of the argument. Whereas in real life, while it's not a given, you typically will find more nuance and at least be less likely to dehumanize the other person in an argument.
Great write-up. I think Bail is on the right track, but I still am wondering why we want to salvage the existing websites. I know we disagree on this point, which is fine! Nice to know we aren't trying to send our reply guys to each other's menchies. ;)
"Being exposed to other viewpoints drives polarization because the “other viewpoints” that algorithms are most likely to float to the tops of our feeds are demeaning toward our viewpoints. This means that if a pro-life Twitter user wanted to see pro-choice Twitter content, they are more likely to see a tweet that says, “Pro-life people hate women,” than they are, “Pro-choice rights are women’s rights!”"
This is the issue I'm seeing, is that we're not even really seeing "the other side," but like you said, what Twitter or Facebook or whatever wants us to see... The worst version of the argument. Whereas in real life, while it's not a given, you typically will find more nuance and at least be less likely to dehumanize the other person in an argument.
Great write-up. I think Bail is on the right track, but I still am wondering why we want to salvage the existing websites. I know we disagree on this point, which is fine! Nice to know we aren't trying to send our reply guys to each other's menchies. ;)