Will RSS undermine tolerance?
"Indeed, the technologies we use to manage our blog reading will reinforce the hierarchy. RSS, for example, imposes the old subscription model on the blogosphere - it’s fundamentally anti-democratic, as it tends to lock us into a set of favorite blogs." - Nicholas Carr in Rough Type (Click here for full article, and for more analysis see this post in the Mediastockblog)
When I attended college, I purposely took a liberal arts route. Although, I knew I would end up in some form of business, I did not want to major in economics or go to the undergraduate business school. My rationale was that college was a place to expand my horizons, see and hear other points of view and learn about different and interesting topics.
As people leave university, settle into jobs, communities and opinions, we interact with other viewpoints in the workplace and by reading newspapers. While I do not believe that newspapers are objective despite their claims (every news editor and writer has his own biases which seep in), newspapers still include a reasonably wide variety of materials and some variety of opinions.
Today, more people are getting their news and opinions online. Initially, this came from online newspapers that were reaosnably similar to the written newspapers and varied in thier content. Now people are interacting more with blogs. Going and finding blogs that are interesting still forced one into contact with information and opinions that are not their own nor in thier comfort zone. This, one would hope, still expands horizons and stretches the mind.
However, RSS takes this one step further, a step that I fear may lead to self-reinforcing narrow-mindedness. I subscribe to RSS feeds, lots of them. They are very helpful for busy people. But as busy people (in an increasingly utilitarian world), we only subscribe to a feed/blog that really interests us or matches our current interests and opinions. These myopic intellectual interactions may lead people to become further entrenched in thier beliefs, having found sufficient like-minded content to keep them busy and close them off from other opinions. I am worried that personalized subscription will lead to even less tolerance than we have today.
I say this partially from personal experience. I stopped reading the Israeli newspapers before the advent of blogs due to their tabloidish style and sparse fact checking (I finally figured out how little you read in the newspapers here is true when they started writing about me. If you were to believe what the Israeli newspapers write, the title of this blog would be EIGHTkidsandafulltimejob.com). I started reading a bunch of blogs when they came online plus the NYT OPEd page. When the NYT OPed Page went to a paid model, I was left only with my blogs. I then realized that my blog subscription list is exclusively tech blogs. I began wondering: How will I learn about stem cell research or understand the issues confronting blue collar workers if all I read is the likes of Om Malik's fabulous blog and the Internet Stock Blog?
I have made a conscious decision to break free of this and am taking the time to read stuff outside of my comfort zone. Our future depends on our ability to understand others and debate very real issues rationally. There is a famous Jewish proverb that goes someting like "Do not judge your friend ('s reaction) until you have been in his place." I wonder if in the future we will truly understand our fellow men without searching for or subscribing to other/s opinions and areas of thought.
What do you think?
When I attended college, I purposely took a liberal arts route. Although, I knew I would end up in some form of business, I did not want to major in economics or go to the undergraduate business school. My rationale was that college was a place to expand my horizons, see and hear other points of view and learn about different and interesting topics.
As people leave university, settle into jobs, communities and opinions, we interact with other viewpoints in the workplace and by reading newspapers. While I do not believe that newspapers are objective despite their claims (every news editor and writer has his own biases which seep in), newspapers still include a reasonably wide variety of materials and some variety of opinions.
Today, more people are getting their news and opinions online. Initially, this came from online newspapers that were reaosnably similar to the written newspapers and varied in thier content. Now people are interacting more with blogs. Going and finding blogs that are interesting still forced one into contact with information and opinions that are not their own nor in thier comfort zone. This, one would hope, still expands horizons and stretches the mind.
However, RSS takes this one step further, a step that I fear may lead to self-reinforcing narrow-mindedness. I subscribe to RSS feeds, lots of them. They are very helpful for busy people. But as busy people (in an increasingly utilitarian world), we only subscribe to a feed/blog that really interests us or matches our current interests and opinions. These myopic intellectual interactions may lead people to become further entrenched in thier beliefs, having found sufficient like-minded content to keep them busy and close them off from other opinions. I am worried that personalized subscription will lead to even less tolerance than we have today.
I say this partially from personal experience. I stopped reading the Israeli newspapers before the advent of blogs due to their tabloidish style and sparse fact checking (I finally figured out how little you read in the newspapers here is true when they started writing about me. If you were to believe what the Israeli newspapers write, the title of this blog would be EIGHTkidsandafulltimejob.com). I started reading a bunch of blogs when they came online plus the NYT OPEd page. When the NYT OPed Page went to a paid model, I was left only with my blogs. I then realized that my blog subscription list is exclusively tech blogs. I began wondering: How will I learn about stem cell research or understand the issues confronting blue collar workers if all I read is the likes of Om Malik's fabulous blog and the Internet Stock Blog?
I have made a conscious decision to break free of this and am taking the time to read stuff outside of my comfort zone. Our future depends on our ability to understand others and debate very real issues rationally. There is a famous Jewish proverb that goes someting like "Do not judge your friend ('s reaction) until you have been in his place." I wonder if in the future we will truly understand our fellow men without searching for or subscribing to other/s opinions and areas of thought.
What do you think?
posted by Michael Eisenberg at 12:55 PM
8 Comments:
the Google Sidebar is an extreme case of this because it builds your rss feeds based on your own comfortable websites (RSS without signing up for it)
HTMaven,
When you subscribe to as many RSS feeds as I do, it helps to turn off the feature on the Google Sidebar that automatically adds "Recent clips" to your list; God knows I have enough litter there already!
exposing oneself to different viewpoints does not expand ones horizons, it only expands a knowledge base. approaching an idea free of biases, prior assumptions and prejudices, which is impossible. I am not a proponent of a liberal arts education, i am in favor of a system that encourages students to focus on courses that interest them and study those intensly; far more productive, in my books.
additionally, people will still go to work and interact with people from different backgrounds and with different views. this will expose them to different opinions as will television, radio and internet. lastly, laptops are far less convenient to read over breakfst than is a newspaper or magazine.
see above: (which is impossible, is the only way to expand ones horizons. )
I think the general point is vital, Michael, but the concern re. RSS isn't warranted.
In the aggregate, RSS will expand exposure to disparate world views -- for two main reasons:
(1) People will come to value their online reading time far more, since overall quality against the info glut is greatly enhanced via RSS. And once online more...
(2)The democratizing forces of the web will burst through the permeable walls of RSS. Why?
Because good (i.e. popular) blogs link to compelling posts *everywhere*, including those of their ideological adversaries, which they are driven to debunk. Think of all the debate that occurs on political blogs re. the Iraq war -- it forces you to confront another side and build/justify your own. That's what classic liberal education is all about.
Also, all the major RSS aggregators push 'most popular' and 'related' feeds -- Rojo is the best at this, with tagged feeds. This is the user's always-present avenue to other viewpoints.
And on the other end, an unheralded blogger with a great idea or report can rise from nowhere and command massive attention -- if the content is compelling. Think of Rathergate. That simply didn't exist before the rise of blogs and the delivery system of RSS.
So RSS is just a powerful media delivery device. It lets you set personal filters around the online marketplace of ideas, but since that marketplace has become so wild, it's a necessary aid, and ultimately, a force for the collective good.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Up-to-date, comprehensive information and resources on compactdishwasher.org is our speciality. You will find all that you need to know and more here.
Post a Comment
<< Home