Discussion has drifted somewhat from OP’s question. Yes, the echo chambers run America now; they’ve been present all along, e.g. with religious and racial divides, increased with cable TV and now accelerate very dramatically with Facebook and the rest of the Internet. And yes, the echo chambers are very bad for society and political processes. Whereas opinions on an issue once tended to distribute like a bell-shaped curve, bimodal curves are common now and the two modes drift further and further apart. Where once a large number of centrists were ready to move forward with compromise, now the two sides of an issue don’t even understand each other.
Yes, in older times towns often had two newspapers, but people often read both, interacted with a variety of people, and attended town meetings. These days, those who pursue politics are more likely to spend their time at an echo chamber rather than at a town meeting which necessarily brings opposite opinions together.
It is ironic and sad that the Internet, which puts the hugest library ever at anyone’s fingertips, seems to be more the problem than the solution:
I’ve no solutions to offer, except perhaps some that would seem very elitist.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Discussion then turned to SDMB. Is it an echo chamber?
I find conservatives to be very well represented in discussions of economics here, with a centrist perspective the consensus. On social issues like gay rights and anti-racism the right is booed down here. On issues like nuclear power and GMO, leftist opposition is booed down here(*). Thus, this Board does have relatively broad diversity of thought; to the extent that it is an “echo chamber” only some on the very far right would stereotype it as a “leftist” echo chamber.
(* Disclaimer. I support nuclear power. I understand that GMO, despite huge potential for ecological damage, allows a larger human population but, unlike the echo consensus here, I understand that overpopulation is a major problem.)
But, like those on the extreme right, I have learned that deviating from the echo chamber’s opinions here is frustrating. For example, someone recently bumped a thread discussing SDStaff CKDexterHaven’s article on the Ark of the Covenant. It is completely obvious that Mr. Haven never read the book by Graham Hancock he claims to review – there was no need for him to read it, the echo chamber told him Hancock is a crackpot. I pointed out the errors and got zero response.
As another example, no one can discuss the Shakespeare authorship controversy here. The thread will fill up with 20 people who know nothing except that the echo chamber tells them anti-Stratfordians are crackpots, and two knowledgeable people who impose different standards of proof on themselves as on others. I won’t debate the controversy itself further: it’s the ignorant echoing response to the controversy that now intrigues me. Feel free to start a Pit thread about that.
The ignorant echoing response I see on a few non-partisan questions gives me sympathy for conspiracy nuts who, even if their ideas are fundamentally wrong, may have legitimate questions but find only ridicule instead of answers. I sometimes find myself on Chief Pedant’s side and sympathize with him that he gets only echo-chamber response. I no longer come to his defense because I find him …, well, too pedantic!
