The Case for Government Control of Internet Speech Grows Weaker: Filter Bubble Edition

Cass Sunstein has been for some time a capable and influential critic of individual choice and limited government.Over the past decade, he has argued that the Internet is failing liberal democracy.Left to their own preferences, he says, individuals choose to avoid political views that challenge their prior beliefs. They form filter bubbles that exclude contrary views and echo chambers that polarize debates. Both complicate solving national problems.These alleged filter bubbles and echo chambers comprise expressing and hearing (or reading) speech, both highly protected activities in the United States (or in any polity deserving the name liberal). The harms of filter bubbles and echo chambers should be much more than alleged to justify government actions to “improve” our debates.Sunstein ’s claims about filter bubbles and echo chambers have a certain appeal. We can imagine people choosing to avoid unpleasant people and views. As communications researcher Cristian Vaccari notes:social media users can make choices as to which sources they follow and engage with. Whether people use these choice affordances solely to flock to content reinforcing their political preferences and prejudices, filtering out or avoiding content that espouses other viewpoints, is, however,an empirical question—not a destiny inscribed in the way social media and their algorithms function.Both older and more recent studies cast doubt on Sunstein ’s claim that the individual choices of Internet use...
Source: Cato-at-liberty - Category: American Health Authors: Source Type: blogs