Filter Bubbles, Essay Example

Eli Parser, in his innovative new book and TED speech, introduces the notion of “filter bubbles.”The first word of the phrase, “filter”, refers to the ubiquitous, albeit invisible, internet application that helps personalize news and information for individual users. For example, Google implements a filter when displaying search results for a queried term that produces different results for different individuals. The differentiation in search results is a built on a number of factors including where the user is accessing the internet, past searches, and even the type and position of the user’s computer. Facebook also filters out news and updates from the site’s “newsfeed” based on factors including what news a user typically selects to read. Thus, the term “filter bubble” refers to the (solipsistic) information bubble that many internet users may find themselves ensconced in, often times against their wishes.  The existence of a “filter bubble” lies in sharp contrast to the resplendent rhetoric casting the internet as the great equalizer in information distribution; a platform to not only learn about other points of view, but also to engage with others leading to a more holistic understanding of the world around us.

Online filter bubbles would inevitably have a deleterious impact on my studies at Walden University.  First, one could argue that the main point of education is to open one’s eyes to the “real world” via the use of analytical tools and research methods. If one takes Parser’s argument seriously, the mere presence of filter bubbles makes the job of education, particularly higher education, inherently more difficult. That is, if one is only exposed to the main or prevailing argument regarding a certain theory, an individual will not be able to make a systematic decision regarding what is academically right or wrong. In addition, the filter bubble could be a particular obstacle during the research process. As a student interested in research, a strident researcher must cull and weave together numerous sources in order to make a cogent case for a particular theory. Filter bubbles inherently complicates the process of conducting research and coming to an intellectually defensible position.

While online filter bubbles are one particularly insidious form of bias, other forms of filter bubbles exist in the offline world as well. If one wanted to make an interesting, and intellectually playful argument, Descartes could be identified as one potential intellectual fountainhead of filter bubbles. Descartes’s most seminal work, the Meditations, was published in 1639, and served as the main treatise of “rational” thought in western thought. In the text of the preverbal classic, Descartes asks the formative question: “How do I know what I know?” After positing a number of different explanations for the basis of knowledge, including deception by an evil demon, Descartes finally concludes that he is sure of what he knows through the use of reason (Descartes, 1996). This example was (playfully) meant to illustrate a counterintuitive point: Even rigorous thinkers with serious intentions to derive rational thought systems can find themselves trapped in a hollow, solipsistic bubble. Indeed, later empirical philosophers such as David Hume would mock the simplistic biases of Descartes in deriving the foundation of his world view.

Cass Sunstein, a former law professor at Harvard, also shows that filter bubbles in the real world can have a palpable impact on how decisions are made in groups. In his book entitled Infotopia, Sunstein shows how individuals agree with facts and decisions in groups that lie in stark contrast to common sense in the real world (Sunstein, 1996).  Although these “filter bubbles” are not found online, the potential for bias in individual and group settings is rampant in the offline world as well.

There are a number of things one can do in order to protect against the insidious and intellectually corrosive effects of filter bubbles.  Just as Parier pointed on in his TED speech, the main strategy is to consciously seek out other viewpoints, especially those that are different from one’s own (Pariser, 2011).  For example, if one is a strident conservative politically, he/she should actively seek out positions taken by “liberals” on the internet. If one is a strict empiricist (philosophically speaking or in life orientation), one could consciously read the works of rationalists in order to get a different view on life. Second, and perhaps more controversial, one could spend less time on the internet. Individuals on the internet often times seek out positions that are closer to theirs; by bypassing time on the internet and seeking to meet new people and ideas, a similar effect could be achieved.

In addition to being an obstacle to academic inquiry and research, filter bubbles can also be used as a counterintuitive teaching tool to increase awareness of why certain bias or educational deficiencies exist.  In this sense, the existence of filter bubbles is not necessarily a pock on the house of academia and self-learning, but rather a powerful case study in how a lack of objective information can lead to poor decision making.

Overall, filter bubbles are an important concept that deserves not only greater debate in our society as a whole, but should also lead individuals to self-examination whether or not they are susceptible to the biases described within.

References

Descartes, R. (1996). The Meditations.  London, U.K.: Cambridge Press.

Sunstein, C. (1996).  Infotopia: How many minds produce knowledge. London, U.K.: Oxford University Press.

Pariser, E. (2011).  Filter Bubbles. Accessed at: http://blog.ted.com/2011/05/02/beware-online-filter-bubbles-eli-pariser-on-ted-com/.