We live in a filter bubble that leads us straight to intellectual isolation
Almost 60% of the world’s population is active on social networks, twice as many as in 2015. Among all the perverse effects of these platforms, the filter bubble is often forgotten or underestimated.
The term “filter bubble” comes from the American activist Elie Pariser, who described this bias in 2011 as a phenomenon of personalising information on social networks through a complex algorithmic process. The algorithms built into the platforms constantly analyse data such as the pages you like, the publications you react to, the people you follow and the links you share. The ultimate aim is to select and present content tailored to each user’s preferences, interactions and past behaviour, in order to provide a more relevant and personalised experience.
An impact on our confirmation bias
There are more than a hundred cognitive biases, which are defined as possible causes, reasons, justifications, or explanations that can alter or impede logical reasoning. These biases represent distortions of information at the cognitive level, primarily affecting our mental processes and knowledge.
The importance of a belief often outweighs the objective truth or falsehood of its subject. Believing in something gives our lives meaning and influences our behaviour, even if later we discover that the belief was unfounded. It is not surprising that deeply ingrained beliefs are less susceptible to change. Confirmation bias can lead us to disregard information that contradicts our existing beliefs.
If we were to simplify the definition of the bubble effect, we could compare it to homophily, which is the inclination to associate with individuals who are similar to ourselves. It is a strong tendency that is challenging to break free from, primarily because it starts from a young age. Whether in school, during holidays, or in the workplace, we often find ourselves surrounded by peers who share similar backgrounds and interests, leading to repetitive conversations and limited exposure to diverse perspectives.
Similar to the echo chamber phenomenon, the bubble effect strengthens our convictions and hinders our ability to critically and constructively analyze information. Consequently, it becomes more difficult to distinguish between reliable and unreliable information. Notably, the internet has further reinforced this social and ideological comfort.
Intellectual laziness?
It is true that from an energy expenditure perspective, it is far less demanding to prioritize information that aligns with our existing beliefs rather than questioning them. Why go through the trouble when it is likely to be uncomfortable? Therefore, alongside physical laziness, intellectual laziness also exists. We have a tendency to seek out examples that confirm our worldview, and these confirming instances are typically readily available.
Nietzsche, however, advises us not to rely solely on our deeply held beliefs and what we call our values. According to Nietzsche, the term “values” refers to one or more principles to which we have attached importance as a group at a given time, but which are bound to evolve over time. These values are sometimes even inherited from traditions or cultures and are detrimental to individual freedom so that everyone can flourish and develop their own reflections. This intellectual isolation also hampers creativity, as repeated exposure to similar opinions and perceptions ends up “unlearning” our ability to imagine something different.
More than an individual impact…
Filter bubbles can also facilitate the spread of misinformation. If we consider the logic of intellectual laziness, reinforced by the immediate availability of content on social media, users are less inclined to fact-check information before sharing it. This significantly contributes to the disinformation of individuals, which can, in the long run, impact the very principle of democracy by reinforcing divisions and polarizations within society.
This cautionary statement has never been more relevant for social networks, as personal information is no longer solely used for commercial purposes but has gained true value in the political domain.
Social media platforms, along with their algorithms, have only amplified a phenomenon that could already exist in the consumption habits of certain individuals. For instance, newspapers often align with different political trends and have regular readers, which also limits critical openness.
The best option remains to diversify one’s sources of information, take the time to cross-reference them, and step out of one’s comfort zone.
And you? What do you do to challenge yourself intellectually? Feel free to share your tips in the comments section.
About this article
This article has been written by a student on the Grenoble Ecole de Management’s Advanced Masters in Digital Strategy Management. As part of a content creation assignment, students are given the task of writing articles based on their digital interests and disseminating the articles online. Articles are marked but we make minimal changes to the content. Thanks for reading! James Barisic, Programme Director, MS DSM.
