When I first heard of Eli Pariser's theme, I agree that it was something of a danger, perhaps. One name for the notion is personlization. This is the idea that some company such as Google would collect information about what I tend to click on in their news stream and send me more information related to topics I tend to choose and less information about other topics, especially information in opposition to my choices and allegiances. So, if I am a Republican, I would get more by, and about, and in support of Republicans and less relating to Democrats.
Pariser and others feel that the practice could lead to increased ignorance on my part, much as though I was a boy in a bubble, cut off from contact with the outside world. I imagine that might indeed happen. I am reminded of the book "Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?" by Beverly Tatum. We work and worry about equal opportunity in this country and are used to asking questions such as what percent of big-city mayors are women? The first answer might be "50% or something is wrong".
But on second thought, I doubt that first answer is so good. I can ask why are all the men in my weekly lunch group older, retired guys. Why are all the members of the sleepover girls of the same age and social group? Yes, if we invited the new girl from Argentina, our group would be more diverse but that is not the goal of the sleepover. If we invited the restaurant manager to join us, would he enjoy our company and our remarks? Would he prefer to be with his friends, who already know and understand his life, and family and background?
I have mentioned before David Weinberger's book "Too Big to Know", which is about the changes discussion and contact on the internet are bringing about. Weinberger makes a persuasive and helpful argument that any subject these days, as well as any group, is too big to know, fully and exhaustively. Any subject, taxes or religion or evolution, encompasses so many reference, so many groups, so many positions and related issues, that it is not possible to be totally aware of them all. We are all ignorant to some degree.
Twitter sends me short messages from people I choose to follow. The more musicians I choose to follow, the more musicians, composers, instrument companies and related musical people and organizations Twitter tells me about and suggests to me. I try not to be totally dominated by music-related tweets but those about chemistry, necromancy and mushrooms are not of interest. Besides, many of the messages in those streams are way over my head. I don't know that they are about. Think of other languages. I studied French, a little German and tiny bits of one or two other languages but I don't want in-group tweets in any language other than English because I really wouldn't know that the heck they mean.
I try to poke my head out of my internet bubble at times but there is a strong limit to where and how far I want to venture. The world is too big for me to know.
--
Bill
Main blog: Fear, Fun and Filoz
Main web site: Kirbyvariety
Pariser and others feel that the practice could lead to increased ignorance on my part, much as though I was a boy in a bubble, cut off from contact with the outside world. I imagine that might indeed happen. I am reminded of the book "Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?" by Beverly Tatum. We work and worry about equal opportunity in this country and are used to asking questions such as what percent of big-city mayors are women? The first answer might be "50% or something is wrong".
But on second thought, I doubt that first answer is so good. I can ask why are all the men in my weekly lunch group older, retired guys. Why are all the members of the sleepover girls of the same age and social group? Yes, if we invited the new girl from Argentina, our group would be more diverse but that is not the goal of the sleepover. If we invited the restaurant manager to join us, would he enjoy our company and our remarks? Would he prefer to be with his friends, who already know and understand his life, and family and background?
I have mentioned before David Weinberger's book "Too Big to Know", which is about the changes discussion and contact on the internet are bringing about. Weinberger makes a persuasive and helpful argument that any subject these days, as well as any group, is too big to know, fully and exhaustively. Any subject, taxes or religion or evolution, encompasses so many reference, so many groups, so many positions and related issues, that it is not possible to be totally aware of them all. We are all ignorant to some degree.
Twitter sends me short messages from people I choose to follow. The more musicians I choose to follow, the more musicians, composers, instrument companies and related musical people and organizations Twitter tells me about and suggests to me. I try not to be totally dominated by music-related tweets but those about chemistry, necromancy and mushrooms are not of interest. Besides, many of the messages in those streams are way over my head. I don't know that they are about. Think of other languages. I studied French, a little German and tiny bits of one or two other languages but I don't want in-group tweets in any language other than English because I really wouldn't know that the heck they mean.
I try to poke my head out of my internet bubble at times but there is a strong limit to where and how far I want to venture. The world is too big for me to know.
--
Bill
Main blog: Fear, Fun and Filoz
Main web site: Kirbyvariety
