[I missed the beginning because I got off the subway at the wrong stop. Ach!]

Rebecca is being sobering and reflective about the drawbacks of blogging. We tend to read the sources we agree with. Weblogs form an echo chamber in which we shut ourselves off from opposing viewpoints. “An environment that creates the illusion that everyone agrees with you destroys the urge to investigate further.”

She points to two sites designed to present different points of view. Slugger O’Toole brings out all viewpoints on the Irish conflict. Dialogue Now does the same for the India-Pakistan conflict.

[I think I largely disagree with Rebecca, while completing agreeing with her. The echo chambers occur around the most divisive political issues. But those are the exceptions in human discourse. Further, understanding and conversation require shared assumptions. Thus, conversations occur among people who agree with one another one way or another. Usually conversations make progress by arguing over the shades, degrees and details, which may look like – and sometimes be – “minutiae,” as Rebecca calls it. Of course, her overall point that we should try to engage with those with whom to disagree is important and incontestable; the question is how well the echo chamber characterizes most of our blogging experience. It’s an important question.]

I asked Rebecca about this in the Q&A session afterwards. She does see the clustering of homogeneous opinions even on less contentious topics.

Categories: Uncategorized dw