Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T06:39:56.594Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Echo Chambers and Audio Signal Processing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2020

Benjamin Elzinga*
Affiliation:
Georgetown University, Washington DC, USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: be72@georgetown.edu

Abstract

Following Cass Sunstein's popular treatment of the concept, echo chambers are often defined as environments which exclude contrary opinions through omission. C. Thi Nguyen contests the popular usage and defines echo chambers in terms of in-group trust and out-group distrust. In this paper, I argue for a more comprehensive treatment. While both exclusion by omission and out-group distrust help sustain echo chambers, neither defines the phenomenon. I develop a social network model of echo chambers which focuses on the role of belief-reinforcing echoes. First, I argue that the model allows us to incorporate Nguyen's main point about distrust without construing other commentators as deeply mistaken about the nature of echo chambers. Second, I use the model to develop an account of collaborative resistance and use it to clarify the role echo chambers play in spreading misinformation.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, E. (2013). The Imperative of Integration. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bakshy, E., Messing, S. and Adamic, L.A. (2015). ‘Exposure to Ideologically Diverse News and Opinion on Facebook’. Science 348(6239), 1130–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Battaly, H. (2014). ‘Varieties of Epistemic Vice’. In Matheson, J. and Vitz, R. (eds), The Ethics of Belief: Individual and Social, pp. 5176. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battaly, H. (2015). ‘Epistemic Virtue and Vice: Reliabilism, Responsibilism, and Personalism’. In Mi, C., Slote, M. and Sosa, E. (eds), Moral and Intellectual Virtues in Western and Chinese Philosophy, pp. 99120. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Battaly, H. (2018 a). ‘Can Closed-mindedness be an Intellectual Virtue?Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements 84, 2345.10.1017/S135824611800053XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battaly, H. (2018 b). ‘Closed-mindedness and Dogmatism.’ Episteme 15(3), 261–82.10.1017/epi.2018.22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Begby, E. (2020). ‘Evidential Preemption’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. Online First. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12654.Google Scholar
Benkler, Y., Faris, R. and Roberts, H. (2018). Network Propaganda: Manipulation, Disinformation, and Radicalization in American Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780190923624.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bicchieri, C. (2016). Norms in the Wild: How to diagnose, Measure, and Change Social Norms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bicchieri, C. and Mercier, H. (2014). ‘Norms and Beliefs: How Change Occurs’. In Xenitidou, M. and Edmonds, B. (eds), The Complexity of Social Norms, pp. 3754. New York, NY: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-05308-0_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, W.J., Wills, J.A., Jost, J.T., Tucker, J.A. and Van Bavel, J.J. (2017). ‘Emotion Shapes the Diffusion of Moralized Content in Social Networks.’ Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 114(28), 7313–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cassam, Q. (2016). ‘Vice Epistemology.’ The Monist 99(2), 159–80.10.1093/monist/onv034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassam, Q. (2018). ‘Epistemic Insouciance.’ Journal of Philosophical Research 43, 120. Online First. doi: 10.5840/jpr2018828131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chater, J. (2016). ‘What the EU Referendum Result Teaches us about the Dangers of the Echo Chamber.’ http://www.newstatesman.com/2016/07/what-eu-referendum-result-teaches-us-about-dangers-echo-chamber.Google Scholar
Clark, D. (2018). Behind the Curve. Delta-v Productions.Google Scholar
Craver, C. and Tabery, J. (2017). ‘Mechanisms in Science.’ In E.N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring Edition), <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/science-mechanisms/>..>Google Scholar
Crockett, M.J. (2017). ‘Moral Outrage in the Digital Age.Nature Human Behaviour 1(11), 769.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dennett, D.C. and LaScola, L. (2015). Caught in the Pulpit: Leaving Belief Behind. Pitchstone Publishing.Google Scholar
Dotson, K. (2014). ‘Conceptualizing Epistemic Oppression.’ Social Epistemology 28(2), 115–38.10.1080/02691728.2013.782585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunning, D. (2011). ‘The Dunning-Kruger Effect: On Being Ignorant of One's Own Ignorance.’ Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 44, 247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantl, J. (2018). Limitations of the Open Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankfurt, H.G. (2005). On Bullshit. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400826537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fricker, M. (2009). Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Garrett, R.K., Weeks, B.E. and Neo, R.L. (2016). ‘Driving a Wedge Between Evidence and Beliefs: How Online Ideological News Exposure Promotes Political Misperceptions.’ Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 21(5), 331–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, A.I. (1979). ‘What is Justified Belief?’ In Pappas, G. (ed.), Justification and Knowledge, pp. 125. Boston: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Haugeland, J. (2002). ‘Authentic Intentionality.’ In Scheutz, M. (ed.), Computationalism: New Directions, pp. 159–74. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Heron, M.J., Belford, P. and Goker, A. (2014). Sexism in the Circuitry: Female Participation in Male-dominated Popular Computer Culture. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society 44(4), 1829.10.1145/2695577.2695582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horton, M. and Freire, P. (1990). We Make the Road by Walking: Conversations on Education and Social Change. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Hosanagar, K. (2016). ‘Blame the Echo Chamber on Facebook. But Blame Yourself, Too.’ Wired. https://www.wired.com/2016/11/facebook-echo-chamber/.Google Scholar
Jamieson, K.H. and Cappella, J.N. (2008). Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jane, E.A. (2016). Misogyny Online: A Short (and Brutish) History. New York, NY: Sage.Google Scholar
Kaplan, S. (2014). ‘With #GamerGate, the Video-game Industry's Growing Pains go Viral.’ The Washington Post.Google Scholar
Lackey, J. (2018). ‘True Story: Echo Chambers are Not the Problem.’ Morning Consult. https://morningconsult.com/opinions/true-story-echo-chambers-not-problem/.Google Scholar
Mackie, J.L. (1965). ‘Causes and Conditions.’ American Philosophical Quarterly 2(4), 245–64.Google Scholar
Mackie, J.L. (1974). The Cement of the Universe: A Study of Causation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mantilla, K. (2015). Gendertrolling: How Misogyny Went Viral. ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
Marwick, A. and Lewis, R. (2017). Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online. New York, NY: Data and Society Research Institute.Google Scholar
Massanari, A. (2017 a). ‘# Gamergate and The Fappening: How Reddit's Algorithm, Governance, and Culture Support Toxic Technocultures.’ New Media and Society 19(3), 329–46.10.1177/1461444815608807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massanari, A.L. (2017 b). 'Damseling For Dollars': Toxic Technocultures and Geek Masculinity'. In Lind, R.A. (ed.), Race and Gender in Electronic Media: Content, Context, Culture. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 316–17.Google Scholar
McDowell, J. (1996). Mind and World. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Medina, J. (2013). The Epistemology of Resistance: Gender and Racial Oppression, Epistemic Injustice, and Resistant Imaginations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, R. (2005). ‘Getting Told and Being Believed.’ Philosopher's Imprint 5(5), 129.Google Scholar
Nguyen, C. (2020). ‘Echo Chambers and Epistemic Bubbles.’ Episteme 17(2), 141–61. doi: 10.1017/epi.2018.32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Connor, C. and Weatherall, J.O. (2019). The Misinformation Age: How False Beliefs Spread. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
O'Rourke, P. (2014). ‘GamerGate has nothing to do with ethics in journalism.’ Canada.com.Google Scholar
Ornstein, M. (2016). Accidental Courtesy: Daryl Davis, Race and America. Independent Lens.Google Scholar
Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: How the New Personalized Web is Changing What we Read and How We Think. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Pariser, E. (2015). ‘Did Facebook's Big Study Kill My Filter Bubble Thesis?’ Wired.Google Scholar
Parkin, S. (2014). ‘Zoe Quinn's Depression Quest.’ The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/zoe-quinns-depression-quest.Google Scholar
Rini, R. (2017). ‘Fake News and Partisan Epistemology.Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 27(2), E-43.10.1353/ken.2017.0025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffer, J. (2012). ‘Causal Contextualisms.’ In Blaauw, M. (ed.), Contrastivism in Philosophy: New Perspectives, pp. 4371. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Spinney, L. (2017). ‘The Shared Past that Wasn't.’ Nature News 543(7644), 168–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, C.R. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sunstein, C.R. (2009 a). Going to Extremes: How Like Minds Unite and Divide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sunstein, C.R. (2009 b). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Thaler, R.H. and Sunstein, C.R. (2009). Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Tufekci, Z. (2014). ‘Engineering the Public: Big Data, Surveillance and Computational Politics.First Monday 19(7). doi: 10.5210/FM.V19i7.4901.Google Scholar