The Internet and Epistemic Agency

2021 ◽  
pp. 389-409
Author(s):  
Hanna Gunn ◽  
Michael Patrick Lynch

In this chapter, Hanna Gunn and Michael Patrick Lynch examine the connection between epistemic agency and the internet. They identify two conditions that are true of responsible epistemic agency: first, responsible epistemic agents aim to develop epistemic virtues, merit, and capacities that help them to responsibly change their epistemic environment, as well as the capacities that enable them to recognize and respect these epistemic traits in others. Second, responsible epistemic agents treat other epistemic agents with a form of respect that demonstrates a willingness to learn from them. Gunn and Lynch then show that the ways in which the internet makes information more widely available can also undermine our ability to be responsible epistemic agents. For instance, the personalization of online spaces can unwittingly lead users into echo chambers and filter-bubbles and away from a diverse range of perspectives, and fake news and information pollution can make for a hostile online epistemic environment.

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 141-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Giacomini

This viewpoint makes a theoretical effort to label the organization of the virtual sphere under new concepts: ‘encastellation’ and the ‘paradox of pluralism’. The former is a metaphorical synthesis of already-known concepts (selective exposure, polarization, homophily, echo chambers and filter bubbles). In the second case, we emphasize the existence of a ‘paradox of online pluralism’: the internet has increased the possibility for everyone to make their voice heard (in quantitative terms), but at the same time it appears to also be increasing the distance between voices, putting in jeopardy the achievement of the aims of the pluralist political system (in qualitative terms). In conclusion, we express doubts about the feasibility of the deliberative vision of democracy in the current virtual sphere.


Author(s):  
Ronald M. Baecker

Politics and government are undergoing dramatic changes through the advent of new technology. The early developers of community networks (mentioned in Section 1.2) had hopeful visions of information technology (IT)-facilitating participatory democracy. Yet the most memorable visions have been literary dystopias, where surveillance is omnipresent and governments have absolute control. We shall begin by highlighting some of these important writings. We shall then consider a current and present topic—the cultural and legal frameworks governing free speech and other forms of expression on the internet. We review several kinds of ‘undesirable’ speech that test our commitment to free speech—messages that are viewed as obscene, hateful, seditious, or encouraging of terrorism. Next, we examine methods governments worldwide use to censor web content and prevent digital transmission of messages of which they disapprove, as well as a similar role for social media firms in what is now known as content moderation. We shall also mention one new form of rampant and very harmful internet speech— fake news. Fake news becomes especially troubling when it is released into and retransmitted widely into filter bubbles that select these messages and echo chambers that focus and sensationalize such points of view to the exclusion of other contradictory ideas. The prevalence and dangers of fake news became obvious during post facto analyses of the 2016 US presidential campaign. The internet and social media enable greater civic participation, which is usually called e-democracy or civic tech. Most such uses of social media are relatively benign, as in online deliberations about the desired size of a bond issue, or internet lobbying to get libraries to stay open longer during the summer. However, for more significant issues, such as violations of fundamental human rights, or unpopular political decisions that incite public unrest, social media communications may facilitate political protest that can lead to political change. IT also plays a role in elections—social media can be used to mobilize the electorate and build enthusiasm for a candidate. Correspondingly, surveys and big data are used to target potential voters during political campaigns and to tailor specific messages to key voters.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (19) ◽  
pp. 140-160
Author(s):  
Recep Ünal ◽  
Alp Şahin Çiçeklioğlu

The recent increase in usage of concepts such as ‘fake news’ or ‘post-truth’ reveals the importance of digital literacy especially on social media. In the digital era, people’s views on different topics are attempted to be manipulated with disinformation and fake news. Fake content is rapidly replacing the reality among new media users. It is stated with concepts such as ‘filter bubbles’ and ‘echo chambers’ that there is a greater tendency for people to be fed with content that is ideologically appropriate to their own views and to believe in fake news in this content. This article analyzes the structure and functioning of fact-checking organizations in the context of preventing propagation of fake news and improving digital literacy. The research is based on content analysis of verification activities of the fact-checking organization Teyit.org, which is a member of International Fact-Checking Network in Turkey, between January 1 and June 31, 2018. By conducting in-depth interviews with the verification team, propagation of fake news on social networks, fact-checking processes and their methods of combating fake news are revealed. Our article found that fake content spreading specifically through the Internet predominantly consists of political issues.


First Monday ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Corinne Jones

As people scream past each other in an increasingly polarized public sphere, fake news emerges as problem for reception on the Internet. While scholars have posited rhetorical listening as a strategy to bridge these differences in off-line spaces, it has not been fully explored online. Online spaces are becoming increasingly salient and important to theorize though, since polarized groups often communicate and miscommunicate on the Internet. Using the fake news that circulated in the wake of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida as a case study, I demonstrate some of the complications for rhetorical listening that arise through algorithms, interfaces, and performances that perpetuate the spread of fake news. As such, I call for more robust digital listening practices and theories that account for complications of the Internet. I conclude that individuals, platforms, and institutions can all actively promote rhetorical digital listening practices. However, we also need to think about other motivations besides ignorance for spreading fake news.


Author(s):  
Yochai Benkler ◽  
Robert Faris ◽  
Hal Roberts

This chapter describes the contours of the epistemic crisis in media and politics that threatens the integrity of democratic processes, erodes trust in public institutions, and exacerbates social divisions. It lays out the centrality of partisanship, asymmetric polarization, and political radicalization in understanding the current maladies of political media. It investigates the main actors who used the asymmetric media ecosystem to influence the formation of beliefs and the propagation of disinformation in the American public sphere, and to manipulate political coverage during the election and the first year of the Trump presidency, , including “fake news” entrepreneurs/political clickbait fabricators; Russian hackers, bots, and sockpuppets; the Facebook algorithm and online echo chambers; and Cambridge Analytica. The chapter also provides definitions of propaganda and related concepts, as well as a brief intellectual history of the study of propaganda.


Author(s):  
Robert E. Goodin ◽  
Kai Spiekermann

This chapter reflects on the election of Donald Trump and the vote of the British electorate in favour of ‘Brexit’ from the European Union. While we refrain from judging the outcomes of these votes, we do discuss concerns pertaining to the lack of truthfulness in both campaigns. After rehearsing the lies on which the Trump and Brexit campaigns were based, we consider different explanations as to why these campaigns were nevertheless successful, and where this leaves the argument for epistemic democracy. Particularly worrisome are tendencies towards ‘epistemic insouciance’, ‘epistemic malevolence’, and ‘epistemic agnosticism’. We also consider the problematic influence of social media in terms of echo chambers and filter bubbles. The core argument in favour of epistemic democracy is that the pooling of votes by majority rule has epistemically beneficial properties, assuming certain conditions. If these assumptions are not met, or are systematically corrupted, then epistemic democracy is under threat.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document