Polarization

**Key words:** polarization, like-minded perspective, cross-cutting perspective, radicalization, political discourse, echo chambers, social media, filter bubbles, algorithms, false consensus effect, Asian chat rooms, anti-Asian sentiment

In political discussion, polarization refers to the phenomenon where the political beliefs of groups of people diverge into ideological extremes. In other words, polarization is when people become more radical and less moderate, unable to find any common ground. Nowadays, people are more ideologically divided than ever. The amount of animosity between groups of people with different political beliefs has increased. Polarization also causes people to be more consistent in their beliefs, for the percentage of people who are consistently liberal or consistently conservative has increased. This means that there is much less overlap in the beliefs of political parties.

## Like-Minded and Cross-Cutting Perspectives

Like-minded perspectives are those that are ideologically similar to one's own perspective, while cross-cutting perspectives are those that are in opposition to one's own perspective. Both can positively or negatively shape political discourse on social media. Coming into contact with both kinds of perspectives online can help individuals gain a better sense of their political standpoint, as like-minded perspectives allow individuals to reinforce their political views while cross-cutting perspectives allow individuals to refine their beliefs, or perhaps to learn which ideologies they agree or disagree with. However, when a person is only exposed to one kind of perspective, it can negatively affect political discourse, cause polarization, and allow extremist groups to form. Although interacting with like-minded perspectives helps people feel safe in their communities, it can also facilitate extremist or racial ideologies that encourage harm and violence onto others, as people's beliefs are never challenged, only reinforced. On the other hand, being overly critical of those with cross-cutting perspectives can escalate into the formation of hate groups. The way in which we interact with others can influence political discourse. It is important to balance our own engagement with like-minded and cross-cutting perspectives; otherwise, political discourse may become futile or volatile.

## Echo Chambers

Echo chambers are spaces, often, but not exclusively, online, where a person only receives information that aligns with their beliefs or opinions that are the same as their own. In other words, people in echo chambers only interact with like-minded perspectives. Their opinions are often reinforced by receiving only the information that they want to see. This lack of diversity or cross-cutting opinions means that echo chambers can cause polarization. They can also lead to radicalization, as the lack of any opposition to ideas introduced to the chamber can cause people's opinions to drift to more extreme positions.

For more about radicalization, consider visiting the "Radicalization" page.

Examples of echo chambers can be found in most if not all types of fandoms, if not all. Fandom members may, consciously or subconsciously, only interact with people who share, for example, a favorite character or a favorite book/movie. This can cause polarization between different sections of a community.

Echo chambers can be especially dangerous when they occur on political platforms, since those who only interact with like-minded perspectives are more susceptible to radicalization. It is vital to be aware and cautious of echo chambers when browsing the internet. Always be sure that you are engaging with a variety of perspectives. Also, make sure to acknowledge biases found in online spaces and information. By absorbing more content and information that does not agree with your preexisting beliefs, you will be more understanding of other perspectives.

## Filter Bubbles

Filter Bubbles are much like echo chambers. They are spaces filled with like-minded individuals who disregard and ridicule opposing viewpoints while emboldening the opinions they already share. Also like echo chambers, filter bubbles contribute to radicalization and the polarization of individuals with differing ideologies. Where filter bubbles differ however, is that they exist exclusively on social media. They are created, either intentionally and otherwise, through the content filtering functions used by social media platforms. Almost all social media gives users the option to filter out content they don’t like (e.g. through disliking a post, blocking a user, or clicking the "not interested" button) and see more of what they do like (e.g. by following certain users, liking a post, or by joining/creating social media groups). Algorithms track these actions and construct a profile of the user and their preferences. Once these preferences are determined, the app will begin curating content that best matches the user's preference, showing more content that is similar to what they have liked and followed, and less content that is similar to what they have disliked and shown poor interest in. This processes applies to political content as well. Eventually, the filtering algorithms will adjust user's feed to show more political takes they are likely to agree with, and less posts that contain opposing political viewpoints. What makes filter bubbles so dangerous is that, once again, they are not created completely intentionally by the user. While the user has to actively like, dislike, follow, and block content, the algorithm changes their feeds automatically. Many users are unaware of the extent to which these automatic changes happen. This leads to false consensus effect, the belief that one's own beliefs and opinions are shared by most others. Filter bubbles limit people's worldview without their knowledge.

## Asian Chat Rooms

The Asian chat rooms correlate with the Asian community's desire to connect and interact with others, as it creates isolated chatrooms based on location and interests. The relevance of the WeChat is that, while “most of its users are in China, millions of people in the US also rely on the app to stay in touch with friends, family, customers, and business contacts in China... President Trump’s recent actions against WeChat could mean these connections may be lost forever in the near future.”  The linkage of the previous president and the distribution of racial perceptions on social media communications drastically changes the mindsets of individuals that perceive the Chinese to link with the Chinese-American to be very different. The perception of social media platforms influence the way people report on incidents of Asian-Americans but it also contradicts the subjugation of anti-Asian Americans to subjectively overwhelm with hate posts.

## Takeaways and Advice

- It is important to find a balance between like-minded perspectives and cross-cutting perspectives. There is nothing wrong with associating with people who share some of the same beliefs or perspectives as you, but it is also important to engage with people with opposing ideas and to not immediately dismiss them.

- Be aware of echo-chambers and invite some diversity of opinion. It is possible to acknowledge another perspective and understand it without necessarily agreeing with it.

- Be aware of how algorithms may be affecting the kind of content you see. It may be good to actively seek out content or perspectives that do not normally show up in your feed.

- Be aware of the false consensus effect. Do not assume that, just because everyone you interact with on the internet agrees with you, the rest of the world also agrees with you.

## Further Reading

Looking for new perspective in medicine, check out the link to learn more about disclosure.

Looking for another perspective in political stance, check this link to learn more.

If you are interested in learning more about echo chambers and filter bubbles, click this link.

If you are interested in learning more about anti-Asian American, check out AAPI.

For more information on filter bubbles, check out this link

## Works Cited

1. *Political Polarization in the American Public.* Pew Research Center, 12 June 2014.
2. Brick, Cameron. “Are Social Media Driving Political Polarization?” *Greater Good*, University of California, Berkely, Jan. 16AD, 2019, greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/is\_social\_media\_driving\_political\_polarization.
3. *Digital Media Literacy: What Is an Echo Chamber?.* GCFGlobal.org.
4. Kulkarni, Manjusha A, et al. “About.” *Stop AAPI Hate*, 4 May 2021.
5. quangduy230598, N/A. “Information Manipulation: Filter Bubble and Echo Chamber.” *MY LIFE AS AN INTERNATIONAL STUDENT IN NORWAY*, 26 Jan. 2021
6. Birbeck, Gretchen L., et al. “Advancing Health Equity through Cross-Cutting Approaches to Health-Related Stigma.” *BMC Medicine*, BioMed Central, 15 Feb. 2019.
7. State Department, US. “Cross-Cutting Issues - United States Department of State.” *U.S. Department of State*, U.S. Department of State, 4 Jan. 2021.
8. Heatherly, Kyle A, et al. “Filtering out the Other Side? Cross-Cutting and like-Minded Discussions on Social Networking Sites.” *New Media & Society*, vol. 19, no. 8, 2016, pp. 1271–1289., doi:10.1177/1461444816634677.

1. ↑ Heatherly, Kyle
2. ↑ Brick, Cameron
3. ↑ Qiang, Vivin. *WeChat and the impact on Asian Americans and communities of color.* Advancing Justice | AAJC, 2020.