BloggerCon and echo chambers
I’m looking forward to the second BloggerCon.
In announcing it, Dave says he’s going to ask each of the moderators to work “Nuking the Echo Chamber” into the discussion. Dave asks: “How do we methodically and systematically overcome the tendency for echo chambers to form and self-perpetuate?” I’m still stuck on the prior question: Are there echo chambers? Are they what we think they are? Are they common? Does their existence mean that participants have closed their minds, or are they conversations that serve a different, but legitimate, social purpose?
What I liked most about last year’s BloggerCon was that it brought together a great bunch of people who shared an enthusiasm for blogging. A conference devoted to openly debating the topic “Blogs: Pro and Con” might also be useful, but it wouldn’t diminish the value of BloggerCon. We believers need a chance to get together, too. Sure, BloggerCon permits contrary points of view, but it’s distinguishable from the “Pro or Con” conference in tone and topic. And that’s a good thing. BloggerCon helps build community and advance thought by letting us be passionate, without having to back off, argue for fundamental principles with which we already agree, and persuade others of the legitimacy of our enthusiasm.
That’s exactly what many alleged “echo chambers” do. And it is not only a good thing but is a requirement for building social groups.
Categories: Uncategorized dw
People should read your post, Mike, but I don’t think I’m word pirating the phrase “echo chamber.” My Salon piece defines it in a way that I think is agreeable to those who use the phrase. I’m saying that the phenomena labeled “echo chambers” don’t really match the definition. I also argue that the concept as defined by its users actually doesn’t make much sense.
A roughly analogous form of argument (simply as an example…ignore the actual content): The “piracy” meme says that those who download copyrighted music without paying for it are pirates. [That’s intended to be a definition acceptable to those who use the piracy meme.] But those to whom the term is applied aren’t actually doing what the meme says, and here’s why… [fill in the blank]. Further, the entire piracy meme makes assumptions that don’t hold water; here’s why…[another blank to fill in].
To be a word pirate, I’d have to deliberately misuse “echo chamber” for political or commercial gain. My argument with the term may be full of crap, but I’m not word pirating it.
“I also argue that the concept as defined by its users actually doesn’t make much sense.”
Then possibly you are not understanding what phenomena they are defining – some pretty smart people have used the term.
What did you think about this definition:
An Echo Chamber is a group that ignores other opinions to their own detriment.
Also do you agree with Kling’s thesis that there is a popular school of thought that holds that changing people’s minds is not a primary goal of public discussion?
http://www.monkeymagic.net/blog/archives/2004_03_01.html#000133
Echo Chambers are a good thing, and direct descendants of the Invisible College concept. Traditionally, these have been used to help us develop new, balanced thinking. Rather than “nuking them”, as Dave Winer suggests, shouldn’t the emphasis be on ma…
Busyblog
All work and no blog means Jack has been a busy project deadlined bee. Normal service should be resuming. Once I get over my Feed Demon phobia….