The shock and outrage that followed the 2024 U.S. Presidential election results effectively demonstrates the dangers of filter bubbles.
Note: this isn't a political post; it's a post that uses a political event to illustrate why those who want to understand the world accurately need exposure to diverse viewpoints.
Many people who lean left on the political spectrum abandoned Twitter soon after outspoken centi-billionaire Elon Musk purchased it for $44 billion and renamed it "X".
These people were outraged by Musk and his views and refused to tolerate him or the imposition of his views on the platform he bought.
Fortunately, these folks had an alternative: social media behemoth Meta launched "Threads" to compete with X, and this new platform was seen by many as a better option.
Threads was nicer. Friendlier. More open-minded. More comfortable.
Over time, Threads became the preferred platform of "the left", leaving X as the preferred platform for "the right".
When "Threaders" encountered a person or post that offended them, almost certainly made by someone who properly belonged on X, many would proudly and liberally use their "block" button to avoid seeing such distasteful opinions again. Eventually, after blocking enough people, the result was a curated feed filled only with similar perspectives.
That was their big mistake.
It's why so many people on Threads expressed such shock and bewilderment at the election results. They decried, "How was a foul-mouthed, convicted felon like Donald Trump able to defeat the incredible and incredibly qualified Kamala Harris?!?"
When your favoured candidate loses, it's natural to feel disappointment.
But if you feel "shock and bewilderment", it means you weren't expecting the results.
And that means you were working with incomplete information, bad assumptions, or both.
In the case of Threaders, the incomplete information was because of their filter bubbles.
By insulating themselves against people who disagreed with their thoughts and feelings, they failed to realize how large a group was on "the other side".
It's important to reiterate this is not a political post. Had the Democrats been successful in the election, I could have just as easily written this same post from the perspective of "the right", since blocking and insulating aren't actions exclusive to left-leaning Threaders.
This post is about the dangers of filter bubbles and the need for people who make decisions to ensure they are as informed as possible.
In his book, The Wisdom of Crowds, James Suroweicki explored the idea that "Large groups of people are smarter than an elite few, no matter how brilliant—better at solving problems, fostering innovation, coming to wise decisions, even predicting the future."
But it's not just "large groups" that you need, it's large groups containing diverse opinions.
It's easy to surround yourself with people who share your thoughts, ideas, philosophies, and morals. These people are like you, and interacting with them is comfortable.
But those who want to be truly aware of the world around them need to make themselves uncomfortable. That means listening to people you don't agree with and consuming media you may not like to read.
You don't need to agree with what people on the opposing end of your thoughts and ideas might say, and you certainly don't have to like their positions. But to ignore or dismiss them without truly understanding why they exist can be a critical mistake, especially if you're trying to appeal to a wide audience. Like a politician or an entrepreneur, for instance.
You can be comfortable and ignorant. Or, you can be uncomfortably aware of perspectives you disagree with and try to understand the objections and obstacles you might face.
But you can't be both.
Comments