Media Bubbles Aren’t The Biggest Reason We’re Partisans

[Slartibartfast]

Media Bubbles Aren’t The Biggest Reason We’re Partisans | FiveThirtyEight

Two people might see the same facts about the current impeachment investigation but interpret that news in wildly different ways. After that story ran, I got a lot of letters from folks who wanted to know how much of that effect was due to media bubbles. Sure, we interpret facts differently. But are we even getting the same facts?

Well, yeah, actually. Mostly, we are. That’s according to Brendan Nyhan, professor of public policy at the University of Michigan. “People have a notion from hearing about [information echo chambers] that most Americans are getting news and information from a very slanted media diet,” he told me. “Empirical evidence suggests that’s not true.”

Yes, seriously. Consider, for instance, the simple math of TV ratings. There are about 122 million Americans who told the Census Bureau that they voted in 2018. The vast majority of those voters don’t watch partisan cable news. FOX News and MSNBC pull in around 3 million viewers when their top hosts are on air. In contrast, around 5 million people tune in to each of the network nightly news shows. More Americans have a centrist media diet than a slanted one. And most Americans are basically fasting.

Even social media, which has provided new opportunities for echo chambers to form, doesn’t seem to be all that successful at politically isolating most of us. In 2018, Nyhan and his colleagues published a paper that found that, while Facebook really was a hive of fake news scum and villainy, the audience for those biased and often fabricated stories was relatively small. In a national sample of about 2,500 Americans, taken during the final weeks of the contentious 2016 presidential campaign, nearly 60 percent of all fake news visits came from the 10 percent of respondents with the most conservative media diets. Our national crisis is actually a niche issue.

An interesting new take on bias in the media with research to suggest fears are overblown. I hope he is right in his analysis, but I look forward to further research on the matter.

 

[Harshaw]

Media Bubbles Aren’t The Biggest Reason We’re Partisans | FiveThirtyEight



An interesting new take on bias in the media with research to suggest fears are overblown. I hope he is right in his analysis, but I look forward to further research on the matter.

I have a good friend from law school who grew up (though we didn't know it at the time) not far from me. We are extremely similar people. We have the same tastes in most things; our upbringings were nearly identical, even watching the same TV channels, and we discovered later that we were in the same place at the same time for countless movies, concerts, cultural stuff; our undergrads are basically 1:1 comparable and obviously we had the same legal education; there is a negligible difference, if any, in intellect. We are interchangeable in many ways, yet we have markedly different political views. Neither of us has an explanation.

 

[Dans La Lune]

The MSM definitely has a centrist slant, rather than a liberal/leftist one. Therein lies the problem. It's a forced centrism; a corporate centrism. The notion that corporatism is somehow a healthy balance between left and right ideologies is probably the most ridiculous thing in politics, far eclipsing Donald Trump.

Also, FiveThirtyEight and anything associated with Nate Silver is more offensive than anything I see on Fox News. He's not a statistician, he's a Twitter troll.

 

[Harshaw]

The MSM definitely has a centrist slant, rather than a liberal/leftist one. Therein lies the problem. It's a forced centrism; a corporate centrism. The notion that corporatism is somehow a healthy balance between left and right ideologies is probably the most ridiculous thing in politics, far eclipsing Donald Trump.

You're saying the MSM has a centrist slant because of "corporatism," but then said the idea that "corporatism" is "balance" is superlatively "ridiculous." Which is it?

Now, of course, earlier you said flat out that the MSM is slanted toward Republicans. (Seriously.) What makes you suddenly change and call it "centrist" here?

Also, FiveThirtyEight and anything associated with Nate Silver is more offensive than anything I see on Fox News. He's not a statistician, he's a Twitter troll.

Yeah, you definitely have some pretty out-there views on the media.

 

[Dans La Lune]

You're saying the MSM has a centrist slant because of "corporatism," but then said the idea that "corporatism" is "balance" is superlatively "ridiculous." Which is it?

What I said should be pretty easy to understand. Centrism = Corporatism in America, which is actually not balanced, but simply corporatist. Not sure what the confusion is, since there is no contradiction.

Now, of course, earlier you said flat out that the MSM is slanted toward Republicans. (Seriously.) What makes you suddenly change and call it "centrist" here?

Yes, corporatism/centrism is slanted towards Republicans. It is Democrats ceding the argument, which is the basis of neo-liberalism. Again, not sure what part you have difficulty with.

Yeah, you definitely have some pretty out-there views on the media.

I'm not sure the problem is me in this case.

 

[Harshaw]

What I said should be pretty easy to understand. Centrism = Corporatism in America, which is actually not balanced, but simply corporatist. Not sure what the confusion is, since there is no contradiction.

Well, now that I know you have a definition of "centrism" which was hitherto known to, and used by, only you, sure, it's a lot clearer. But by plain (read: the actual) definitions of those words, what you said is, indeed, a contradiction.

Yes, corporatism/centrism is slanted towards Republicans. It is Democrats ceding the argument, which is the basis of neo-liberalism. Again, not sure what part you have difficult with.



I'm not sure the problem is me in this case.

Uh, yeah. You're kind of in your own little world there (or perhaps you really are on the Moon, as your screen name suggests), so I guess the best thing is just to leave you to it.

 

[Dans La Lune]

Well, now that I know you have a definition of "centrism" which was hitherto known to, and used by, only you, sure, it's a lot clearer. But by plain (read: the actual) definitions of those words, what you said is, indeed, a contradiction.

Perhaps you didn't read my post carefully -- I specifically said 'corporate centrism'. Which is not just an acknowledged term, but a widely used term. So... the problem here is not me.

Uh, yeah. You're kind of in your own little world there (or perhaps you really are on the Moon, as your screen name suggests), so I guess the best thing is just to leave you to it.

I'm happy either way. See above.

Also, Nate Silver is a known Twitter troll. That's not a far-out opinion, it's kinda of the reality of his modern identity post-2016. So I'm not sure what you're actually challenging me on when I'm stating mainstream stuff.

 

[Harshaw]

Perhaps you didn't read my post carefully -- I specifically said 'corporate centrism'. Which is not just an acknowledged term, but a widely used term. So... the problem here is not me.



I'm happy either way. See above.

Also, Nate Silver is a known Twitter troll. That's not a far-out opinion, it's kinda of the reality of his modern identity post-2016. So I'm not sure what you're actually challenging me on when I'm stating mainstream stuff.

Okey dokey.