Phillybits Reflects on the “Echo Chamber” of Thought in the Blogosphere and Elsewhere 5
I recommend this post to everyone who blogs, even occasionally, on politics and the polity, wherever on the spectrum of the political rainbow you might fall:
Yet sometimes the echo chamber itself becomes a very dangerous thing and in fact, this was made quite obvious over the weekend with the right-wing outrage over a Travel section piece in the NYT regarding the location of Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney’s retreat homes, I guess, in St. Michael’s, MD. The right seized on the article as if it were a threat to the security and safety of Donald Rumsfeld, and furthermore, a deliberate attempt by the NYT to put their lives in jeopardy.
(snip)
And so when it became known that the photographer had gotten Rumsfeld’s permission, it made no difference. And then when it was later confirmed with Rumsfeld’s office permission was given, as well as with the Secret Service that the article posed no threat, it made little difference.
(snip)
Given the fact that it has now been confirmed that the story in the NYT was not, never was, and never will be a threat to the safety of Rumsfeld and/or Cheney, I have to wonder – with all the attention the Right put into pushing this story, riling up the freaks into writing all about this non-story, how many people, notwithstanding Rumsfeld and Cheney, but employees of the Times, the photographer who had permission to take the photograph of Rummy’s house, as well as the children who some suggested should be hung as bait for sexual predators, they may have very possibly put at risk themselves.
July 4, 2006 at 8:17 pm
Thanks for the linkback, I appreciate it.
July 4, 2006 at 8:25 pm
It was a damned good post.
July 4, 2006 at 11:41 pm
Thanks, Frank. It was one of the rare times I actually sit down and write something, although lately, I’ve been trying to do that.
I think it has to do, in part, with the echo chamber effect. I could offer my take on an issue, and it would simply get in line behind everyone else making the same point, but with different words.
It’s hard to find a voice, somnething that makes you branded, and attractive with readers. I’m been trying to write more lately in my own terms instead of just recycling the same stuff. This past w/e brought some out, mainly because of the whole rightwing Rumsfeld Times article, but nonetheless, it feels good to write extensively on a topic that generally isn’t covered elsewhere.
Currently, it’s up on Kos right now, sitting still with 5 comments, 2 or 3 of them mine, and 2 recommends. Recommends aside, I was hoping more people would’ve taken the main topic of the diary and tossed it around a little more.
It seemed the very first commentor enterpreted what I wrote almost as an attack, asking for an example of a negative left-wing echo chamber.
I had to respond that it wasn’t the intention, just more of an observation and the belief that we must always stride to keep ourselves above that level of discourse and never sink that low.
July 4, 2006 at 11:42 pm
Happy 4th of July, btw.
July 5, 2006 at 8:16 pm
The first example of a negative left-wing echo chamber I can think of, having done no research whatsoever, is the Great Deborah Howell storm this past spring.
It was pretty disgusting.
That to the side, it does seem to me that a higher percentage of wingnut blogs are actuated by sheer, unadulterated hatred than are liberal-leaning blogs. Yeah, a lot of liberal-leaning blogs show a lot of gut-level hatred of Bush and his apologists, but not hatred of anyone and everyone who disagrees with them.
On the other hand, far too many liberal-leaning blogs (and commentators of all stripes) show contempt and disdain for those who lean to the right. If you show contempt to someone, you are never never never going to have a chance to discuss things with him.
On all sides of the political spectrum, we need to realize that people of good will can honestly disagree and should–that’s a big should–be able to discuss their differences in a civilized fashion.
This, of course, runs directly counter to the electoral strategy of Karl Rove and his sycophants, who know that, if they can demonize the opposition, their followers will therefore not listen to the opposition.
To the extent that liberals and moderates fall into the Rovian trap of demonizing the opposition, they reduce their chances of getting a hearing. On the other hand, to the extent that the Rovian attacks are not returned, attack for attack, liberal-leaning persons concede the advantage to the attacker.
Just some musings.