The Causes and Consequences of Polarization 

in A DIGITAL PUBLIC SQUARE

An analysis of the digital public square and a comment on tensions in discourse.

Trevor Macdonald

16 December 2023

Introduction

        Picture this: a world where information flows freely, connecting minds and fostering vibrant discussions all across the globe. The internet, hailed as the ultimate democratizer of knowledge, promised to bridge gaps, open doors, and usher in a new era of peace and mutual understanding!

….Needless to say, it’s not exactly a controversial opinion to say that the reality of the internet perhaps hasn’t been quite the utopia we originally imagined.

It’s almost impossible to undersell just how much the advent and subsequent explosion of the internet has revolutionized every aspect of how information is disseminated and consumed. Personal computers, smart phones, and especially social medias have radically reshaped the dynamics of public discourse in unprecedented ways. Many of these changes have been slowly integrated over time to be the new normal, but one in particular seems to pervasively rear its ugly head in an invocation of the mythical hydra, a true societal monster that only grows stronger and stronger with each attack against it. Along with online communication’s incredible ability to bring people together and provide boundless opportunities that would’ve been inconceivable or simply impossible in the past, the digital landscape also serves as a warzone for the alarming rise of online polarization. In 2022 nearly half of Americans expected a civil war in the next few years, one in five now believes political violence is justified. In this short essay, I will explore the idea and causes of online polarization, as well as some of the consequences a hostile digital public square has on the civil expression of individuals as well as in the macrocosm of society as a whole.

What Makes Something “Polarizing”?

         “Online polarization” truly does have far-reaching consequences for both political engagement and democratic societies as a whole even if it may at first glance appear to be just another buzzword. There are, of course, quite a wide range of different factors which can make a social media platform “polarizing”, but some of the most prevalent offenders are information cascades and designs and algorithms which prioritize engagement above all else, both of which contribute to the direct and indirect promotion of echo chambers.

Social Information Cascade

An information cascade is a phenomenon that occurs when a person makes a decision based solely on the decisions of other people, while ignoring their own personal knowledge to the contrary. Or, in other words, a cascade develops when people abandon their own information in favor of inferences based on earlier people’s actions. Social information cascades play a pivotal role in shaping online polarization, particularly within the realm of social media. These cascades occur when individuals make decisions based on the actions of others, leading to a widespread adoption of certain beliefs or behaviors. In the context of social media, users are often exposed to information shared by their peers, creating a dynamic where individuals are influenced by the opinions and actions of those in their social network. This phenomenon contributes significantly to the amplification and reinforcement of existing beliefs, as users tend to align with the prevailing sentiment within their online communities. Consequently, the nature of how humans share information on social media platforms can inadvertently foster polarization by facilitating the formation of echo chambers where like-minded individuals reinforce and validate each other's views while dismissing opposing perspectives: Twitter (or “X”) users who follow and share more polarized news coverage tend to lose social ties to users of differing ideologies. The rapid dissemination and repetition of information within these echo chambers then can contribute to the solidification and mental separation of ideological divides, making it challenging for individuals to consider diverse viewpoints or engage in the constructive dialogue that’s so integral to a healthy democratic society. The impact of social information cascades on online polarization underscores the importance of information literacy, critical thinking, and willingness to engage constructively with others who hold opinions different to your own.

Engagement Algorithms

Information cascades are a known social phenomena where the potential for polarization is indirectly present in how information spreads and is grouped online, but putting how humans spread information aside, it’s important to note the very direct challenges social media presents on its own. Thanks to the economic incentive to keep users actively online for as long as possible, social media algorithms are intricately designed to prioritize user engagement above all else. However, this emphasis on engagement has inadvertently contributed to the amplification of online polarization. Driven by the pursuit of maximizing user interaction, these algorithms often prioritize content that aligns with a user's existing beliefs and preferences, creating echo chambers where individuals are exposed to information that reinforces their preconceived notions. Then, as users engage more with content that resonates with their views, the algorithms respond by continuing to curate content that it thinks will keep you happy and engaged, in the process creating a radicalizing feedback loop that deepens already existing divisions. When individuals are exposed to increasingly divergent viewpoints by algorithms which prioritize engagement over quality, the potential for meaningful dialogue and compromise harshly diminishes. Democratic societies cannot function in an environment where individuals are more likely to dismiss opposing perspectives altogether rather than engage in productive conversations.

Consequences

In an echo chamber, the chain reaction feelings of anger and fear are the fuel which drives radicalizing polarization. These feelings corrupt a person’s view of the world into one that is horrifyingly bleak, leaving them to desperately thrash out against an imagined enemy which corrupts their influence and extinguishes their rationality via eliminating the sharing of ideas. Echo chambers present a false view of reality where one is either on your team, or a threat, and living a life viewing every interaction as containing oppression is to become a permanent victim, because if all you are is a nail, everything looks like a hammer. A report on the findings of a psychological study of radicalized social media users summarizes with: “Anger is trench warfare while those who fear are left with a view of darkness and bleak despair.” (Wollebæk, Karlsen, Steen-Johnsen, Enjolras 2019). One of the most tantalizing things about tribalism is that it offers a shelter for those who are afraid where you don’t actually have to think very much. You begin to pick up the cues from everyone else, slowly dwindling your acquaintances to only those who reinforce you. Eventually, an opposing view is not just alien, but is an incomprehensible horror. Fear becomes a wedge used to drive people apart and further corrupt what truth is. Political journalist Andrew Sullivan shares a quote he found on a radicalized message board which can provide an insight into how anxiety is manipulated to create an echo chamber of polarization: “ ‘They hate you. Leftists don’t merely disagree with you. They don’t merely feel you are misguided. They don’t think you are merely wrong. They hate you. They want you enslaved and obedient, if not dead. Once you get that, everything that is happening now will make sense.’ ” (Sullivan 2017). There is clearly no civility, reason, or compromise in this message.

Overall, online polarization has profound consequences for individuals, impacting their mental well-being, interpersonal relationships, and overall societal engagement. As individuals (often unwittingly) immerse themselves in echo chambers and algorithmically curated content that only reinforces pre-existing beliefs, they become susceptible to confirmation bias and are less likely to encounter diverse perspectives, creating a distorted worldview that fosters an unhealthy "us versus them" mentality. Social media platforms that are designed to maximize user engagement often prioritize sensational content as well, preying off of fear and sensationalism for more clicks at the cost of pushing ideological divides further and further apart. This polarizing separation only increases social isolation and the slow erosion of empathy, often fueling extremism as well, as individuals become more entrenched in extreme ideologies without exposure to constructive discussion or other moderating influences. Ultimately, the consequences of online polarization extend far beyond the digital realm, shaping individuals' perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors in the real world.

What do we do about it?

         The proliferation of online polarization certainly isn't the most fun topic to write or read about, but fortunately for us, there are several things we can do to combat it. In fact, simply being aware of how we consume information online can play a huge role in protecting us from the various mental pitfalls of polarizing echo chambers. We must be diligently mindful when we participate in the digital public square and never forget the importance of meaningful discussion, healthy disagreement, media literacy, and compromise. As writer Jonah Berger puts it, “We are so focused on our desired outcome that we’re consumed with how we can push people in that direction. But along the way, we tend to forget about the person whose mind we’re trying to change.” (Berger 2020, 10).