The Danger of Information Cascades in Social Media Echo Chambers
Regardless of your political leaning, the result of this past election was both shocking and unprecedented. Many pollsters and people who were actively following the election were confused how this result could possibly occur when their newsfeeds, timelines, and information circles were filled with pro-Hilary poll results, leading voters to believe that his election would be a landslide. However, that was not the case, and some data from social media during the election shows alarming results that speak to the danger of social media as a news source as it stands right now.
While Trump and Hilary had similar followings in terms of size, Trump led in his following on Twitter and Facebook as well as his popularity within his constituency (more likes/favorites per post). The most alarming statistic, however, is the number of searches for each candidate. Trump had an alarming 7.49 million average monthly searches of his full name while Hilary only had 165,000. While one could argue that people would be far more likely to search “Hilary” or “Trump” than either candidate’s full name, the disparity in searches is great enough that this argument is irrelevant.
This election showed that being polarizing is more important than being prepared, but this was only made possible by the negligence of social media outlets that collectively failed to acknowledge their impact on the election. Sites like Facebook make a tremendous effort to personalize your social media experience, catering every share, recommendation, and advertisement to the individual user. While this has proven to be an effective strategy for making money without monetization on the user end, this has created informational echo chambers that prevent people from seeing differing or alternative news. As a result they not only become close-minded, but they begin to believe that everyone has the same opinion as them. This method of making money has prevented people from engaging in intelligent discourse, as they simply don’t have the opportunity see the other side’s view in their echo chambers.
The informational echo chambers that result are extremely dangerous because they lead to information cascades by presenting people with the same information over and over forcing them to lean one way or the other. It is unlikely that someone who is friends with many Hilary supporters would be exposed to any pro-Trump information or vice-versa. This brings people to believe in extremes as they are inherently pushed from a potentially moderate stance, to more radical thoughts as Facebook gradually begins to categorize their activity.
Social media outlets need to begin to acknowledge their presence as a news outlet, and see that they indirectly alter the entire election process. Facebook uses the idea of informational cascades to market many of their products. They need to begin to use this understanding to save their users from becoming castaways on their own informational islands, where the voices from dissenting opinions are not heard.