Some evidence does suggest that the Internet makes people more likely to select politically congenial sources of information. The book challenges ready partisanship and the standard geek assumption that technology is somehow both politically liberating and politically neutral.ĮVEN SO, PARISER'S CASE is not as watertight as it might seem. Pariser is a technology geek and the former executive director of MoveOn, an online organization that has many virtues but is not distinguished for an intellectually nuanced understanding of the other side's perspective. The book is cogently argued and clearly written by someone endeavoring to counter his own ways of filtering the world. It draws extensively on the relevant research literature but isn't overwhelmed by it. The Filter Bubble is an excellent book in a genre usually given to ill-informed pontification. If we are not regularly confronted with surprising facts and points of view, we are less likely to come up with innovative solutions. Furthermore, intellectual cocooning may stifle creativity, which is spurred by the collision of different ways of thinking about the world. Traditional media, in which editors choose stories they believe to be of public interest, have done this job better than do trivia-obsessed new media. Exposure to the other side allows for the creation of a healthy "public" that can organize around important public issues. Pariser, who is inspired by the philosophy of John Dewey, argues that ideological opponents need to agree on facts and understand each other's point of view if democracy is to work well. This self-reinforcement may have unhappy consequences for politics. The result, Pariser suggests, may be "a static ever-narrowing version of yourself." And because the information we are exposed to perpetually reshapes our interests, we can become trapped in feedback loops: Google's perception of what we want to read shapes the information we receive, which in turn affects our interests and browsing behavior, providing Google with new information. Google's understanding of our tastes and interests is still a crude one, but it shapes the information that we find via Google searches. Personal decisions contribute to this pattern, and ever more sophisticated technologies add to it. Our personal economies of information seem complete despite their deficiencies. Not only are we unaware of the information that is filtered out, but we are unaware that we are unaware. We are beginning to live in what Pariser calls "filter bubbles," personalized micro-universes of information that overemphasize what we want to hear and filter out what we don't. Google infers what people want from their past searching behavior and skews results accordingly. Few people are aware that when they look up a topic in Google, their searches are personalized. Without our knowing, they reshape our information worlds according to their interpretation of our interests. Even worse, services like Google and Facebook distort the mirror so that it exaggerates our grosser characteristics. Instead of constructing personal micro-economies that allow us to make sense of complexity, we are turning media into a mirror that reflects our own prejudices back at us. What Cowen sees as enhancing individual autonomy, Pariser sees as restricting personal development. In his new book, The Filter Bubble, Eli Pariser looks at the same facts as Cowen but interprets them differently. Instead of reading the same newspaper or watching the same television news, we can use new technologies to choose an idiosyncratic mix of sources and create our own unique micro-economy of information that not only reflects our tastes but helps us continually reshape them. In a 2009 book about the social consequences of the Internet, The Age of the Infovore, the economist and blogger Tyler Cowen argues that new technologies enable us to decide what information to consume and, as a result, to remake ourselves.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |