Underneath the Filter Bubble: The Role of Weak Ties and Network Cultural Diversity in Cross-Cutting Exposure to Disagreements on Social Media

Seong Jae Min, Donghee Yvette Wohn

Abstract


While the idea of the filter bubble, in which people are sheltered from challenging and disagreeable news, is a valid concern for democracy, it requires much theoretical sophistication and empirical support.  This paper explores the extent and scope of filter bubble effects, employing the concept of “cross-cutting exposure,” or exposure to disagreeable viewpoints, on social media.  Survey analysis of 271 Facebook users suggests they do get exposed to cross-cutting information frequently, and that cross-cutting information was more likely to come from weak ties, or acquaintances and strangers in their network, as opposed to strong ties of friends and families.  Furthermore, those who have ethnically and religiously more diverse networks were more likely to be exposed to cross-cutting information.  Taken together, it is argued that the current concern for the filter bubble is rather exaggerated and that one’s network characteristics, such as network compositions and cultural diversity, can influence the degree of the filter bubble.

Keywords


cross-cutting exposure, diversity, Facebook; filter bubble; weak ties

Full Text:

PDF

References


Allcott, H. & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspective, 31(2), 211-236. doi: 10.1257/jep.31.2.211

Ansolabehere, S. & Schaffner B.F. (2014). Does survey mode still matter? Findings from a 2010 multi-mode comparison. Political Analysis, 22(3), 285-303.

Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinions on Facebook. Science, 348, 1130-1132. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa1160

Barnidge, M. (2017). Exposure to political disagreement in social media versus face-to-face and anonymous online settings. Political Communication, 34, 302-321. doi: 10.1080/10584609.2016.1235639

Beam, M. A., Child, J. T., Hutchens, M. J., & Hmielowski, J. D. (2017). Context collapse and privacy management: Diversity in Facebook friends increases online news reading and sharing. New media & Society, Advanced online publication. doi: 10.1177/1461444817714790.

Beam, M. A., Hutchens, M. J., & Hmielowski, J. D. (2018). Facebook news and (de) polarization: reinforcing spirals in the 2016 US election. Information, Communication & Society, Advanced online publication. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2018.1444783.

Choi, J., & Lee, J. K. (2015). Investigating the effects of news sharing and political interest on social media network heterogeneity. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 258-266. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.029

Eveland, W. P., & Hively, M. H. (2009). Political discussion frequency, network size, and “heterogeneity” of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation. Journal of Communication, 59(2), 205-224. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01412.x.

Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298-320. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfw006

Garrett, R. Kelly. 2009. “Politically Motivated Reinforcement Seeking: Reframing the Selective Exposure Debate.” Journal of Communication, 59(4):676-699. doi:10.1111/j.14602466.2009.01452.x.

Gentzkow, M., & Shapiro, J. (2011). Ideological separation online and offline. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126 (4), 1799-1839. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjr044.

Gottfried, J. & Shearer, E. (2016). News use across social media platforms 2016. Pew Research Center. Retrieved May 22, 2017 from http://www.journalism.org/2016/05/26/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2016/.

Graellis-Gardo, E., Lalmas, M., & Quericia, D. (2014). People of opposing views can share same interests. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web, 281-282.

Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. doi: 10.1086/225469

Haim, M., Graefe, A., & Brosius, H. (2018). Burst of the filter bubble? Effects of personalization on the diversity of Google News. Digital Journalism, 6(3), 330-343. doi: 10.1080/21670811.2017.1338145.

Hampton, K., Goulet, L., Her, E.J. & Rainie, Lee (2009). Social isolation and new technology. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/18--Social-Isolation-and-New-Technology.aspx.

Katz, E. & Lazarsfeld, P. (1955). Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communications. New York: The Free Press.

Kim, Y., Chen, H.-T., de Zuniga, H.G. (2013). Stumbling upon news on the Internet: Effects of incidental news exposure and relative entertainment use on political engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2607-2614. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.005.

Kim Y., Hsu, S.H. & de Zuniga, H.G. (2013). Influence of social media use on discussion network heterogeneity and civic engagement: the moderating role of personality traits. Journal of Communication, 63, 498-516. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12034.

Lee, J. K., Choi, J., Kim, C., & Kim, Y. (2014). Social media, network heterogeneity, and opinion polarization. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 702-722. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12077.

McDonald, D. G., & Dimmick, J. (2003). The conceptualization and measurement of diversity. Communication Research, 30(1), 60-79. doi: 10.1177/0093650202239026.

Messing, Solomon & Westwood, S.J. (2014). Selective exposure in the age of social media: Endorsements trump partisan source affiliation when selecting news online. Communication Research, 41(8), 1042-1063. doi:10.1177/0093650212466406.

Min, S. J., & Wohn, D. Y. (2018). All the news that you don’t like: Cross-cutting exposure and political participation in the age of social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 83, 24-31. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.01.015.

Mislevy, J. (2009). Objective and Subjective Measures of Diversity: How They Relate to One Another and Climate Perceptions. Institutional Research, Planning & Assessment. Paper presented at the MdAIR Conference at the University of Maryland.

Mitchell, A., Gottfried, J., Barthel, M. & Shearer, E. (2016). The modern news consumer. Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project. July 7, 2016. Retrieved May 3, 2017 from http://www.journalism.org/2016/07/07/the-modern-news-consumer/.

Mutz, D. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Mutz, D. & Mondak. J.J. (2006). The workplace as a context for cross-cutting political discourse. Journal of Politics, 68(1),140-155. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00376.x.

Newman, N., Fletcher, R., & Kalogeropoulos, A., Levy, D., & Nielsen, R.K. (2017). Reuters Institute digital news reports 2017. Oxford, UK: Reuters Institute.

Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: How the new personalized web is changing what we read and how we think. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Parkins, H. (2016, November 14). Click and elect: How fake news helped Donald Trump win a real election. The Guardian. Retrieved from https//www.theguardian.com.

Pew Research Center (2014). Global religious diversity. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/2014/04/04/global-religious-diversity/

Read, M. (2016, November 9). Donald Trump won because of Facebook. New York Magazine, Retrieved from http://www.nymag.com.

Scheufele, D. A., Nisbet, M. C., Brossard, D., & Nisbet, E. C. (2004). Social structure and citizenship: Examining the impacts of social setting, network heterogeneity, and formational variables on political participation. Political Communication, 21(3), 315-338. doi: 10.1080/10584600490481389.

Scheufele, D. A., Hardy, B. W., Brossard, D., Waismel-Manor, I. S., & Nisbet, E. (2006). Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship. Journal of Communication, 56(4), 728-753. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00317.x.

Schudson, Michael. 1998. The good citizen: A history of American civic life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. New York: Penguin Books.

Sunstein, C. (2003). Why societies need dissent. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Sunstein, C. (2017). #Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Tewksbury, D. Weaver, A., & Maddex, B. (2001). Accidentally informed: Incidental news exposure on the World Wide Web. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(3), 533-554. doi: 10.1177/107769900107800309.

Vitak, J. (2012). The impact of context collapse and privacy on social network site disclosures. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(4), 451-470. doi: 10.1080/08838151.2012.732140.

Wohn, D. Y., & Bowe, B. J. (2014). How social media facilitates social construction of reality. In Proceedings of companion publication of CSCW 2014, 261-264. New York, NY: Association for Computer Machinery (ACM). doi: 10.1145/2556420.2556509.

Wohn, D. Y., & Bowe, B. J. (2016). Micro agenda setters: The effect of social media on young adults’ exposure to and attitude toward News. Social Media + Society, 2(1). doi: 10.1177/2056305115626750.

Wohn, D. Y., Min, S. J., Bowe, B. J., & Patel, S. (2017). Ethnic network diversity, and familiarity and engagement with race-related news on Facebook. Paper presented at the 2017 AEJMC conference, Chicago, Aug.11.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Based at Tarleton State University in Stephenville, Texas, USA, The Journal of Social Media in Society is sponsored by the Colleges of Liberal and Fine Arts, Education, Business, and Graduate Studies.