“…people’s increasing ability to customize their political information will have a polarizing impact on our democracy as media users become less likely to encounter information that challenges their partisan viewpoints.”
This statement is accurate too! People have the choice to pick where they get their information from. There are many tv stations, radio stations, and internet sources that have an ideological agenda. For example, many radio stations are mostly conservative and some tv news stations, like CNN, may be more liberal. It is very rare to see a person hopping around to different tv stations especially if they find the news station that is comfortable for them to watch. They would want to stick to the ones that relate most to them. It is safe to say that a person’s source of information does affect how one tends to view things on the political spectrum. But if one is loyal to a news station that continues to tell information that benefits their political beliefs, then the media should not have the power to challenge one’s partisan viewpoints or political culture.
I agree with Norah. This statement is true. We have the choice to decide where to get our information from, therefore many people will tend to stick with what they know rather than branching off to find stations where there is diverse opinions on politics.
I agree with this statement and the comments above me as well. While citizens have the freedom to choose their media station people will choose the station they either agree most with or feel comfortable with. This being said, the information they are getting may not be the correct information.
I also agree with this statement. Different media stations have different political viewpoints. Some are very conservative while others are extremely liberal. Depending on which news outlet you choose to follow, your views and ideas will most likely align with theirs. Citizens will not test the other side because of the abundance of information that they get from their one sided station, leaving them in belief that there way is the only way.
This sentiment can be shared by most, because a lot of people that already have determined their ideologies and or partisan views are unlikely to change them. Most people can agree on this statement and even find that they themselves apply this into their own ideology.
This statement can also be found true, as connected with the previous quotes as well. Prior previously mentioned that people's choices, whether they be to watch entertainment or not take the initiative to learn about politics, are the leading cause of lack of political knowledge in America. As the amount of choices and options for citizens continues to rise, as does their tendency to stray from the topic of politics. Yet another choice that will lead to this is that of what media to expose oneself to. As Norah, Sydney, and Shannon all said before me, many people would simply rather to turn on a channel that presents information in a manner that they agree with, or that they feel comfortable watching. Not many people will purposefully choose a source that is biased towards the other side or has a different point of view, one that may upset them or cause them to question what they know and have accepted. On the other hand, those individuals well-versed in politics may intentionally gather information from sources that they know will contradict each other for the sole purpose of checking the facts and claims made by each. On the other hand, people that continually absorb information from one origin tend to develop one-sided, heavily partisan views due to lack of contact with any other opinions or views that dispute theirs. As people increasingly choose to avoid conflicting media, the partisan divide continues to grow.
I also agree with this statement. Adding to what my fellow classmates have mentioned before me, I believe that when viewers are given the option of which station to watch, they will naturally choose the channel that closely sides with their political ideology. For example, in my family my dad is a strong conservative, therefore Fox News is our primary station for political consumption. Even when watching politics, people still want to be entertained. One would not gain satisfaction from watching a show that challenges/disproves their personal beliefs. However, with a variety of channels to choose from, voters have the ability to select a station that caters to their philosophy. In addition, people will become more extreme on the political spectrum because the opposing opinion won't be as prevalent in one's mind. This will cause voters to lean more to the right/left than they did with broadcast television, thus having a polarizing effect on our democracy.
I agree with this statement too. People choose where they want to get their news and information from. If they find a news station that they like, then they will keep watching that station because it probably follows the person's ideology. If the person wants to find another station to get information and goes against their beliefs on the political spectrum then, they will not watch that station and challenge their viewpoint.
Similar to everybody else’s comments on this statement, I also agree. Now that there is a wide variety of media, people have more choices on what they want to read, watch etc.. Since this is possible, people have the choice to avoid any media that challenges their viewpoints resulting in less understanding and even worse, less political knowledge. This also results in a conflictual government because when media sources are biased people who do not believe in those view points will not listen and hear them out. They will simply change the channel or click another link. I agree with Stephen, since a lot of people have already identified their ideologies and partisan views, they will most likely not change, and no problems will be resolved in that manner.
This statement is correct because, as argued in my first comment, the growing number of news stations allows for individuals to gravitate toward stations that correlate with their personal preferences. In terms of news, there are multiple stations that cater to different political ideologies. As Keri and others have mentioned, people will not want to watch a station that conflicts with their opinions, as this is not enjoyable or entertaining in the least. Due to the amount of choices, people may receive information in different contexts depending on the stations they watch. For example, on Fox News, a conservative network, Hillary is portrayed as a crook; they only shed light on her negative qualities. However, on CNN, a liberal network, Hillary’s actions on equality and other positive topics are covered. Obviously, one’s opinion on Hillary Clinton could be altered after watching one of these stations daily. People’s viewpoints can become very narrow and one-sided if they continuously receive only information which aligns with their ideology from the many ideology-based news networks that exist today. These stations could become a pivotal part of one's political socialization. People in the broadcast era were given factual news accounts that were not biased to favor one party or ideology. They were left to interpret the news any way they wanted instead of having the anchors tell them how to interpret news, like the single ideology-driven news networks do today. As the quote says, voters’ ideologies will be increasingly polarized as they only watch networks that agree with their ideologies.
I 100% agree with this statement. Many different news channels are bias, and those who usally agree with what a certain channel has to say will tend to watch that channel. Also they may try to avoid watching channels that oppose their views. Thus, with the many different options people have today to receive their news, it is increasingly harder for them to encounter viewpoints that clash with their own.
I find this statement to be true, as seen by others previously as well. Previously, Prior has explained throughout the whole article that the lack of political knowledge is through the people's choices, like choosing to watch politics or to be amused by entertainment. With the amount of options of media continues to increase for those in America, the actual tendency to stay and side with the politics point of view tends to fall apart. As seen in responses from Shannon and Norah previously, they both had said what I was thinking as well which is that many citizens would rather view a channel that has information that they side with or feel comfortable watching, rather than facing information they cannot grasp. Many people using media will not choose a source that is biased or has “fake news” about their topic and towards the other side. This may cause them to feel questionable of what they already know about a topic and may cause their feelings to be hurt or challenged. With this happening, people may just tend and really side with entertainment purposes of media. However, those who are interested in politics will use their new choices at their disposal and intake information that may challenge them and cause them to learn more about each topic and side (increases political knowledge). People tend to attain a one side view stance due to the lack of political knowledge of the other sides of the topic. This split will grow due to those who are less likely to challenge their viewpoint.
I agree with this statement. Most people get their information from TV news and many news stations are biased due to political opinion like CNN and Fox News. If people want to get their news from biased news stations it will affect our democracy because people's opinions will change or be influenced. Also when people get biased information, it is clearly harder to get real info that is reliable.
I completely, 100% agree with this statement. With the extensive amount of news and media sources out there for public use, a person who is involved in politics is less likely to come in contact with information that clashes with their beliefs. Modern media outlets like the Internet are customizable, allowing individuals to control which information is readily available to them and which sources are ignored. People tend to block out information that attacks or proves their beliefs wrong, which leads to biased and one-sided arguments excelling rather than more truthful sources. This is the complete opposite of what takes place in real life, causing a decrease rather than an increase in political knowledge. To increase political knowledge, a person must take in multiple arguments and process different views on the same story, in order to form their own opinions and ideas. Only being exposed to one side leads to the inability to defend one’s argument and a lack of thought process behind it. Arguments are about making points and acknowledging both sides, not screaming over each other and only listening to one side of the story. So, an increase in ability to change and customize one’s media sources will definitely cause a lack of people coming into contact with views that oppose them. It will also lead to a chain reaction of negative effects, involving a decrease in overall political knowledge and a general conflictual rather than consensual agreement among our political society.
I agree with this statement because many people are stuck in their own beliefs to even expand their knowledge. An extremely liberal person would be unlikely to watch an extremely conservative station and vice versa. They don’t want to be challenged so they stick to what they think is right and assume everything else is wrong because they refuse to see all sides to an issue or topic. This also comes down to the person and whether they choose to watch something new or stick to their own beliefs.
Like many others, I also completely agree with this statement. Due to how vast our media has become, it truly difficult to come into contact with information on politics unless on purpose. As Madison said, there is a lack of thought process because of this, and people have become so oblivious to what is happening because they choose to pay more attention to other things that bring them entertainment. There are no positive effects from this and more people lose their motivation to gain political knowledge.
I agree because people now have the ability to kust search what they want to see or follow news/media that covers their viewpoint on issues. This does not allow the people to hear a statement about an issue that may not agree with and try to argue it. The people now can just watch certain news channels or follow certain articles online that focus on their viewpoints and have similar political beliefs. Also I agree with Sydney how people will now not watch or read information that may have different points and arguments that challenge the person’s viewpoint.
I agree with the statement because of the ability to choose what to see. Internet allows people to search what they want to see, probably something that aligns with their own political ideology. Most people, when stumbling upon a source that opposes their beliefs, will just close out of it and remember to not go to that source again. To sum it up, since people can choose to see what they want, they will rarely see articles/websites that will challenge their argument/viewpoint.
I agree with this statement. The public has the ability to choose where they get their political information from, and can limit information they do not want to be previewed to. This, however, is what has and continues to divide our country. Blocking out the other side of the argument instead of acknowledging what they have to say only creates a greater barrier between the two opposing parties. By sharing with the audience both opinions, they can develop their own views, which can help lead to a more united, bipartisan government. Having two different sides (such as CNN and FOX News) only makes the public become "brain-washed" to one idea and always battling the other side. So while I do agree with that media users are able to distance themselves from the other challenging views, I do not believe it is healthy in our democracy.
I agree with this statement because people with a limited desire to consider media sources outside of sources that they are comfortable with lack opposition to their opinions. If a person is not willing to understand the other side of the political spectrum, they are left with political information that supports only their opinion. People like this create a political environment that encloses their political beliefs and shuts out opposing arguments against those opinions. Fair enough, this generates debate, but it does not consider others' opinions.
I agree with this statement. Many people who want to gain more political knowledge for their beliefs they most likely tune into biased news channels, for example Fox News, because they hear what they wanna here. And a lot of times the information people are given from the news will cause people to research more on those topics which will also lead to more biased websites.
I agree with this, because people are much more likely to use news sources that agree with their ideology and opinions than ones that disagree. This leads to people never hearing any argument or opinion from the other side, and thus losing the ability to understand differing opinions. This could also lead to people being tricked into believing "fake news" that seems to agree with them on an ideological basis. Thus, polarization could reach a point where no one even has accurate information, but merely information that confirms their political biases.
I agree with this statement, those who are interested in politics have strong opinions. The sources they get it from are probably biased and based on their own opinion. For example the news, people who tend to have the same opinion as the news station they are watching will generally stick to that station, and avoid other channels and media with a different opinion. Like Zachary said this point that we are at where people involved in politics tend to only hear from articles and news that they agree with, can lead to a point where no one has accurate information and be all biased.
I agree with this quote because all people in this country have political stanses and bias. With this being said, pointed out in earlier quotes you can't force people to hear what they don't want to hear. With this already happening, American citizens choose to listen to bias information on politics that agrees with their opinion. This leads to people becoming more aware with their opinion and less with counter arguments which doesn't fully expand their knowledge resulting in citizens to only be aware of their side of the story.
I agree with this statement too. Many Americans have one specific news channel they stick too. That is where they “trust” the most accurate information is given to them. They will then most likely go by the opinions given to them by that station and align with their beliefs and ideas. However there are media stations that are extremely liberal or even very conservative. This would affect the turnout on the way they receive certain information on topics. This all depends on the news cast and how the person takes in the information.
I also agree with this statement. People are able to choose what they believe in and where they get their information from. By choosing what to view and learn about, people will less likely view the other side. People are bias, that is just the way it is, always has been. This could be seen as to why we have conflict in our country, because people don't recognize the other side, and listen to other political views.
I also believe this statement to be correct. Depending on where people get their news from, that station or program will usually have a political ideology that they report on. People who watch these programs most likely agree with the news and opinions they are given and will have a harder time seeing another point of view. This is because they will be shown facts and stories that will cause them to believe that their opinion is the only one that is correct, therefore making it harder for them to see or agree with any other side.
I agree with this statement. In a climate with so many choices, some people may find it more comfortable to choose a news source that agrees with their views. While there are people who want to hear the many sides of an issue, sometimes it may be more convenient for others to watch a news station or read a news website that agrees with them politically. Also, with greater choices, it is easier for people to find more biased media and it is much easier for them to escape media that does not agree with them.
The privilege to customize one's political information allows that person to choose not to experience the discomfort or aggravation caused by hearing views that do not align with their own. Naturally, people do not like to have their opinions challenged by someone else and would probably think that a biased news outlet that is different from their view is just incorrect. This issue becomes dangerous when someone accepts the information supporting their opinion even if it comes from a source with low credibility. Also, this person may automatically discount factual information from a reliable source that does not support their opinion. This results in the strengthening of people's political opinions (often based on false or extremely biased information) and the distancing of society as a whole from the center of the political spectrum.
I agree with this statement. Many people have opinions that align with either a mostly conservative point of view or a mostly liberal point of view. Given this, due to the wide range of resources, they will have more than enough sources to watch and read articles from and they will choose specific sources that concur with their perspectives. Whilst doing this, most of them will avoid using sources that challenge their opinions. This can be detrimental and lead to a conflictual United States because many citizens will not understand another persons point of view from the opposite side of the political spectrum and will be quick to judge or avoid interacting with them. The ability to customize the information a person contains can also cause them to rely so much on that information that they only agree with it but do not actually believe it and have their own, true opinion on it.
This statement is very true as well. Because people can easily choose their interests of media, they will be very unlikely to learn more information because they’ll want to hold true to their opinions, as I mentioned in the previous comment.
I agree with this statement. The public has the ability to completely ignore news and important topics if they do not like the biased opinion of the source of the information. They have the ability to almost hear what they want to hear based on their political ideology. If they find a source of information that agrees with their ideology they will most likely continue to tune into that one source because they like the idea that other people agree with their opinions on the important topics.
I agree with this statement and the other comments. Not many people will want to challenge their opinions by viewing any media that opposes them. Most will only view what they agree with to validate their opinions even further and gain more knowledge to go against the other side whenever possible. This challenges our democracy by having two polarized sides that refuse to view and learn about their opposing ideas.
This statement is completely true. The customization of political viewpoints makes it easy for people to block information that doesn't appeal to them or follow information that does, so they never have to encounter a person of the opposing side. Unfortunately, this leads to a largely biased way of thinking so people are less politically knowledgable.
I agree with this statement. while there are numerous sources for information from different points of view, they could be blocked out by incoming biased information depending on the point in time. If a ground breaking issue suddenly caught the attention of the public and most of them are taking one side, it is hard to find different points of view.
I agree with Mike that opposing views can be easily blocked in order to appeal to one person. Democracy is already pretty polarized as Democrats an Republicans often do not agree on anything, so the customization just increases the separation. With limited confrontation with an opposing point of view, many people will become extremists and strictly only believe what their own party says, therefore decreasing political knowledge.
I could not agree more with this statement. A more conflictual political culture will result from increasing customization of political information because everyone will only listen to the information they want to hear. Just as Norah had mentioned, once a person has found comfortability with a station or Tv channel, its unlikely that they will look elsewhere for news. In our society people don't like to be challenged, especially on their knowledge.
I believe many may turn away from bias news sources as the internet allows people to formulate their own views based on multiple sources. This will allow a more consensual political environment as people will not only look at bias news sources but instead look at all aspects before coming up with their opinion.
I will agree with this statement as well as Melanie’s previous statement. People normally don’t like to be proven or made to feel wrong. By going against their belief they are risking being wrong. Also, people tend to be emotional when it comes to politics, so by going against their belief it would be causing unnecessary controversy. In today's modern age you can have any pick at where you can get your news from allowing people to never really branch out and get their news from places they know will agree with them. The more media sites the more controversy thus, being more of a conflictual political culture.
I agree with this statement completely. This day in age one can specifically go to a site or station that shares their specific ideology. This means they will only share the political news in based on their point of view. This bias way of gaining information makes sure a citizen is only learning what their side believes. This makes it difficult to see other sides of the proposed situation. Because of this people will not have a complex ideology or have any reason or thing to change their opionions. On top of this it makes it hard for people to even listen or accept other ways of thinking because they have only ever heard their specific biased side.
Agreeing with my classmates, this statement can be considered true too. People have the freedom to choose where they gain their knowledge and information. The amount of TV/radio stations, internet and newspaper sources are endless. Each one has certain ideological viewpoints. Examples such as Fox News are more conservative while CNN tends to be more liberal. People watch these specific channels to gain the information they want to hear. Rarely does it occur when someone is hopping around the different stations. Many people stick with what they are comfortable with rather than flipping through channels that have diverse opinions and views on politics.
I agree with this statement. Many viewers choose to watch what they’ve always watched and read the same newspapers. These all have bias opinions. If the viewers don’t watch multiple channels or read many articles from different authors, they are likely only going to receive one opinion and one side of the facts. This is because the media is biased.
I completely agree that those with the strongest political view points will go in search of information that only furthers their opinion, and ignore those that discredit what they believe in. No one wants to be proven wrong, nor do they care to read other viewpoints, so the focus on bias and one sided media sources only increases. People enjoy their egos being stroked instead of being forced to recognize their own wrongdoings.
I agree with this statement because as people tailor their media profiles the more limited the information they see becomes and that's most likely preferred because who doesn't like being agreed with.
I agree with this staement because everyone has their own political view, and can choose where they get their information from. They can watch news stations that have similar view points and follow politicians/candidates who are members of the same party and most likely on the same side of the political spectrum.
I agree with this statement as well. Nowadays it is easy to avoid hearing the perspective of the opposite party, to avoid frustration, etc. So, people choose to receive news from biased sources, that they agree with, and can become blind to the other sides of a story.
Like I have mentioned on previous posts, when people have the ability to choose what they see for news can result in viewing the issue from an incorrect perspective, when in reality, if they saw it happen right in front of them, they might think about something different. The medias ability to frame stories and change the context while still holding it true is one of the biggest problems.
I agree with this statement, because everyone is different and everyone can decide what they believe in and have their own political views and don’t have to be a follower and can watch whatever they want to watch about the side they side with on TV or the Internet.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis statement is accurate too! People have the choice to pick where they get their information from. There are many tv stations, radio stations, and internet sources that have an ideological agenda. For example, many radio stations are mostly conservative and some tv news stations, like CNN, may be more liberal. It is very rare to see a person hopping around to different tv stations especially if they find the news station that is comfortable for them to watch. They would want to stick to the ones that relate most to them. It is safe to say that a person’s source of information does affect how one tends to view things on the political spectrum. But if one is loyal to a news station that continues to tell information that benefits their political beliefs, then the media should not have the power to challenge one’s partisan viewpoints or political culture.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Norah. This statement is true. We have the choice to decide where to get our information from, therefore many people will tend to stick with what they know rather than branching off to find stations where there is diverse opinions on politics.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement and the comments above me as well. While citizens have the freedom to choose their media station people will choose the station they either agree most with or feel comfortable with. This being said, the information they are getting may not be the correct information.
DeleteI also agree with this statement. Different media stations have different political viewpoints. Some are very conservative while others are extremely liberal. Depending on which news outlet you choose to follow, your views and ideas will most likely align with theirs. Citizens will not test the other side because of the abundance of information that they get from their one sided station, leaving them in belief that there way is the only way.
ReplyDeleteThis sentiment can be shared by most, because a lot of people that already have determined their ideologies and or partisan views are unlikely to change them. Most people can agree on this statement and even find that they themselves apply this into their own ideology.
ReplyDeleteThis statement can also be found true, as connected with the previous quotes as well. Prior previously mentioned that people's choices, whether they be to watch entertainment or not take the initiative to learn about politics, are the leading cause of lack of political knowledge in America. As the amount of choices and options for citizens continues to rise, as does their tendency to stray from the topic of politics. Yet another choice that will lead to this is that of what media to expose oneself to. As Norah, Sydney, and Shannon all said before me, many people would simply rather to turn on a channel that presents information in a manner that they agree with, or that they feel comfortable watching. Not many people will purposefully choose a source that is biased towards the other side or has a different point of view, one that may upset them or cause them to question what they know and have accepted. On the other hand, those individuals well-versed in politics may intentionally gather information from sources that they know will contradict each other for the sole purpose of checking the facts and claims made by each. On the other hand, people that continually absorb information from one origin tend to develop one-sided, heavily partisan views due to lack of contact with any other opinions or views that dispute theirs. As people increasingly choose to avoid conflicting media, the partisan divide continues to grow.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with this statement. Adding to what my fellow classmates have mentioned before me, I believe that when viewers are given the option of which station to watch, they will naturally choose the channel that closely sides with their political ideology. For example, in my family my dad is a strong conservative, therefore Fox News is our primary station for political consumption. Even when watching politics, people still want to be entertained. One would not gain satisfaction from watching a show that challenges/disproves their personal beliefs. However, with a variety of channels to choose from, voters have the ability to select a station that caters to their philosophy. In addition, people will become more extreme on the political spectrum because the opposing opinion won't be as prevalent in one's mind. This will cause voters to lean more to the right/left than they did with broadcast television, thus having a polarizing effect on our democracy.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement too. People choose where they want to get their news and information from. If they find a news station that they like, then they will keep watching that station because it probably follows the person's ideology. If the person wants to find another station to get information and goes against their beliefs on the political spectrum then, they will not watch that station and challenge their viewpoint.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to everybody else’s comments on this statement, I also agree. Now that there is a wide variety of media, people have more choices on what they want to read, watch etc.. Since this is possible, people have the choice to avoid any media that challenges their viewpoints resulting in less understanding and even worse, less political knowledge. This also results in a conflictual government because when media sources are biased people who do not believe in those view points will not listen and hear them out. They will simply change the channel or click another link. I agree with Stephen, since a lot of people have already identified their ideologies and partisan views, they will most likely not change, and no problems will be resolved in that manner.
ReplyDeleteThis statement is correct because, as argued in my first comment, the growing number of news stations allows for individuals to gravitate toward stations that correlate with their personal preferences. In terms of news, there are multiple stations that cater to different political ideologies. As Keri and others have mentioned, people will not want to watch a station that conflicts with their opinions, as this is not enjoyable or entertaining in the least. Due to the amount of choices, people may receive information in different contexts depending on the stations they watch. For example, on Fox News, a conservative network, Hillary is portrayed as a crook; they only shed light on her negative qualities. However, on CNN, a liberal network, Hillary’s actions on equality and other positive topics are covered. Obviously, one’s opinion on Hillary Clinton could be altered after watching one of these stations daily. People’s viewpoints can become very narrow and one-sided if they continuously receive only information which aligns with their ideology from the many ideology-based news networks that exist today. These stations could become a pivotal part of one's political socialization. People in the broadcast era were given factual news accounts that were not biased to favor one party or ideology. They were left to interpret the news any way they wanted instead of having the anchors tell them how to interpret news, like the single ideology-driven news networks do today. As the quote says, voters’ ideologies will be increasingly polarized as they only watch networks that agree with their ideologies.
ReplyDeleteI 100% agree with this statement. Many different news channels are bias, and those who usally agree with what a certain channel has to say will tend to watch that channel. Also they may try to avoid watching channels that oppose their views. Thus, with the many different options people have today to receive their news, it is increasingly harder for them to encounter viewpoints that clash with their own.
ReplyDeleteI find this statement to be true, as seen by others previously as well. Previously, Prior has explained throughout the whole article that the lack of political knowledge is through the people's choices, like choosing to watch politics or to be amused by entertainment. With the amount of options of media continues to increase for those in America, the actual tendency to stay and side with the politics point of view tends to fall apart. As seen in responses from Shannon and Norah previously, they both had said what I was thinking as well which is that many citizens would rather view a channel that has information that they side with or feel comfortable watching, rather than facing information they cannot grasp. Many people using media will not choose a source that is biased or has “fake news” about their topic and towards the other side. This may cause them to feel questionable of what they already know about a topic and may cause their feelings to be hurt or challenged. With this happening, people may just tend and really side with entertainment purposes of media. However, those who are interested in politics will use their new choices at their disposal and intake information that may challenge them and cause them to learn more about each topic and side (increases political knowledge). People tend to attain a one side view stance due to the lack of political knowledge of the other sides of the topic. This split will grow due to those who are less likely to challenge their viewpoint.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement. Most people get their information from TV news and many news stations are biased due to political opinion like CNN and Fox News. If people want to get their news from biased news stations it will affect our democracy because people's opinions will change or be influenced. Also when people get biased information, it is clearly harder to get real info that is reliable.
ReplyDeleteI completely, 100% agree with this statement. With the extensive amount of news and media sources out there for public use, a person who is involved in politics is less likely to come in contact with information that clashes with their beliefs. Modern media outlets like the Internet are customizable, allowing individuals to control which information is readily available to them and which sources are ignored. People tend to block out information that attacks or proves their beliefs wrong, which leads to biased and one-sided arguments excelling rather than more truthful sources. This is the complete opposite of what takes place in real life, causing a decrease rather than an increase in political knowledge. To increase political knowledge, a person must take in multiple arguments and process different views on the same story, in order to form their own opinions and ideas. Only being exposed to one side leads to the inability to defend one’s argument and a lack of thought process behind it. Arguments are about making points and acknowledging both sides, not screaming over each other and only listening to one side of the story. So, an increase in ability to change and customize one’s media sources will definitely cause a lack of people coming into contact with views that oppose them. It will also lead to a chain reaction of negative effects, involving a decrease in overall political knowledge and a general conflictual rather than consensual agreement among our political society.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement because many people are stuck in their own beliefs to even expand their knowledge. An extremely liberal person would be unlikely to watch an extremely conservative station and vice versa. They don’t want to be challenged so they stick to what they think is right and assume everything else is wrong because they refuse to see all sides to an issue or topic. This also comes down to the person and whether they choose to watch something new or stick to their own beliefs.
ReplyDeleteLike many others, I also completely agree with this statement. Due to how vast our media has become, it truly difficult to come into contact with information on politics unless on purpose. As Madison said, there is a lack of thought process because of this, and people have become so oblivious to what is happening because they choose to pay more attention to other things that bring them entertainment. There are no positive effects from this and more people lose their motivation to gain political knowledge.
ReplyDeleteI agree because people now have the ability to kust search what they want to see or follow news/media that covers their viewpoint on issues. This does not allow the people to hear a statement about an issue that may not agree with and try to argue it. The people now can just watch certain news channels or follow certain articles online that focus on their viewpoints and have similar political beliefs. Also I agree with Sydney how people will now not watch or read information that may have different points and arguments that challenge the person’s viewpoint.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the statement because of the ability to choose what to see. Internet allows people to search what they want to see, probably something that aligns with their own political ideology. Most people, when stumbling upon a source that opposes their beliefs, will just close out of it and remember to not go to that source again. To sum it up, since people can choose to see what they want, they will rarely see articles/websites that will challenge their argument/viewpoint.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement. The public has the ability to choose where they get their political information from, and can limit information they do not want to be previewed to. This, however, is what has and continues to divide our country. Blocking out the other side of the argument instead of acknowledging what they have to say only creates a greater barrier between the two opposing parties. By sharing with the audience both opinions, they can develop their own views, which can help lead to a more united, bipartisan government. Having two different sides (such as CNN and FOX News) only makes the public become "brain-washed" to one idea and always battling the other side. So while I do agree with that media users are able to distance themselves from the other challenging views, I do not believe it is healthy in our democracy.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement because people with a limited desire to consider media sources outside of sources that they are comfortable with lack opposition to their opinions. If a person is not willing to understand the other side of the political spectrum, they are left with political information that supports only their opinion. People like this create a political environment that encloses their political beliefs and shuts out opposing arguments against those opinions. Fair enough, this generates debate, but it does not consider others' opinions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement. Many people who want to gain more political knowledge for their beliefs they most likely tune into biased news channels, for example Fox News, because they hear what they wanna here. And a lot of times the information people are given from the news will cause people to research more on those topics which will also lead to more biased websites.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this, because people are much more likely to use news sources that agree with their ideology and opinions than ones that disagree. This leads to people never hearing any argument or opinion from the other side, and thus losing the ability to understand differing opinions. This could also lead to people being tricked into believing "fake news" that seems to agree with them on an ideological basis. Thus, polarization could reach a point where no one even has accurate information, but merely information that confirms their political biases.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement, those who are interested in politics have strong opinions. The sources they get it from are probably biased and based on their own opinion. For example the news, people who tend to have the same opinion as the news station they are watching will generally stick to that station, and avoid other channels and media with a different opinion. Like Zachary said this point that we are at where people involved in politics tend to only hear from articles and news that they agree with, can lead to a point where no one has accurate information and be all biased.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this quote because all people in this country have political stanses and bias. With this being said, pointed out in earlier quotes you can't force people to hear what they don't want to hear. With this already happening, American citizens choose to listen to bias information on politics that agrees with their opinion. This leads to people becoming more aware with their opinion and less with counter arguments which doesn't fully expand their knowledge resulting in citizens to only be aware of their side of the story.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement too. Many Americans have one specific news channel they stick too. That is where they “trust” the most accurate information is given to them. They will then most likely go by the opinions given to them by that station and align with their beliefs and ideas. However there are media stations that are extremely liberal or even very conservative. This would affect the turnout on the way they receive certain information on topics. This all depends on the news cast and how the person takes in the information.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with this statement. People are able to choose what they believe in and where they get their information from. By choosing what to view and learn about, people will less likely view the other side. People are bias, that is just the way it is, always has been. This could be seen as to why we have conflict in our country, because people don't recognize the other side, and listen to other political views.
ReplyDeleteI also believe this statement to be correct. Depending on where people get their news from, that station or program will usually have a political ideology that they report on. People who watch these programs most likely agree with the news and opinions they are given and will have a harder time seeing another point of view. This is because they will be shown facts and stories that will cause them to believe that their opinion is the only one that is correct, therefore making it harder for them to see or agree with any other side.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement. In a climate with so many choices, some people may find it more comfortable to choose a news source that agrees with their views. While there are people who want to hear the many sides of an issue, sometimes it may be more convenient for others to watch a news station or read a news website that agrees with them politically. Also, with greater choices, it is easier for people to find more biased media and it is much easier for them to escape media that does not agree with them.
ReplyDeleteThe privilege to customize one's political information allows that person to choose not to experience the discomfort or aggravation caused by hearing views that do not align with their own. Naturally, people do not like to have their opinions challenged by someone else and would probably think that a biased news outlet that is different from their view is just incorrect. This issue becomes dangerous when someone accepts the information supporting their opinion even if it comes from a source with low credibility. Also, this person may automatically discount factual information from a reliable source that does not support their opinion. This results in the strengthening of people's political opinions (often based on false or extremely biased information) and the distancing of society as a whole from the center of the political spectrum.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement. Many people have opinions that align with either a mostly conservative point of view or a mostly liberal point of view. Given this, due to the wide range of resources, they will have more than enough sources to watch and read articles from and they will choose specific sources that concur with their perspectives. Whilst doing this, most of them will avoid using sources that challenge their opinions. This can be detrimental and lead to a conflictual United States because many citizens will not understand another persons point of view from the opposite side of the political spectrum and will be quick to judge or avoid interacting with them. The ability to customize the information a person contains can also cause them to rely so much on that information that they only agree with it but do not actually believe it and have their own, true opinion on it.
ReplyDeleteThis statement is very true as well. Because people can easily choose their interests of media, they will be very unlikely to learn more information because they’ll want to hold true to their opinions, as I mentioned in the previous comment.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement. The public has the ability to completely ignore news and important topics if they do not like the biased opinion of the source of the information. They have the ability to almost hear what they want to hear based on their political ideology. If they find a source of information that agrees with their ideology they will most likely continue to tune into that one source because they like the idea that other people agree with their opinions on the important topics.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement and the other comments. Not many people will want to challenge their opinions by viewing any media that opposes them. Most will only view what they agree with to validate their opinions even further and gain more knowledge to go against the other side whenever possible. This challenges our democracy by having two polarized sides that refuse to view and learn about their opposing ideas.
ReplyDeleteThis statement is completely true. The customization of political viewpoints makes it easy for people to block information that doesn't appeal to them or follow information that does, so they never have to encounter a person of the opposing side. Unfortunately, this leads to a largely biased way of thinking so people are less politically knowledgable.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement. while there are numerous sources for information from different points of view, they could be blocked out by incoming biased information depending on the point in time. If a ground breaking issue suddenly caught the attention of the public and most of them are taking one side, it is hard to find different points of view.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mike that opposing views can be easily blocked in order to appeal to one person. Democracy is already pretty polarized as Democrats an Republicans often do not agree on anything, so the customization just increases the separation. With limited confrontation with an opposing point of view, many people will become extremists and strictly only believe what their own party says, therefore decreasing political knowledge.
ReplyDeleteI could not agree more with this statement. A more conflictual political culture will result from increasing customization of political information because everyone will only listen to the information they want to hear. Just as Norah had mentioned, once a person has found comfortability with a station or Tv channel, its unlikely that they will look elsewhere for news. In our society people don't like to be challenged, especially on their knowledge.
ReplyDeleteI believe many may turn away from bias news sources as the internet allows people to formulate their own views based on multiple sources. This will allow a more consensual political environment as people will not only look at bias news sources but instead look at all aspects before coming up with their opinion.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI will agree with this statement as well as Melanie’s previous statement. People normally don’t like to be proven or made to feel wrong. By going against their belief they are risking being wrong. Also, people tend to be emotional when it comes to politics, so by going against their belief it would be causing unnecessary controversy. In today's modern age you can have any pick at where you can get your news from allowing people to never really branch out and get their news from places they know will agree with them. The more media sites the more controversy thus, being more of a conflictual political culture.
I agree with this statement completely. This day in age one can specifically go to a site or station that shares their specific ideology. This means they will only share the political news in based on their point of view. This bias way of gaining information makes sure a citizen is only learning what their side believes. This makes it difficult to see other sides of the proposed situation. Because of this people will not have a complex ideology or have any reason or thing to change their opionions. On top of this it makes it hard for people to even listen or accept other ways of thinking because they have only ever heard their specific biased side.
ReplyDeleteAgreeing with my classmates, this statement can be considered true too. People have the freedom to choose where they gain their knowledge and information. The amount of TV/radio stations, internet and newspaper sources are endless. Each one has certain ideological viewpoints. Examples such as Fox News are more conservative while CNN tends to be more liberal. People watch these specific channels to gain the information they want to hear. Rarely does it occur when someone is hopping around the different stations. Many people stick with what they are comfortable with rather than flipping through channels that have diverse opinions and views on politics.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement. Many viewers choose to watch what they’ve always watched and read the same newspapers. These all have bias opinions. If the viewers don’t watch multiple channels or read many articles from different authors, they are likely only going to receive one opinion and one side of the facts. This is because the media is biased.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that those with the strongest political view points will go in search of information that only furthers their opinion, and ignore those that discredit what they believe in. No one wants to be proven wrong, nor do they care to read other viewpoints, so the focus on bias and one sided media sources only increases. People enjoy their egos being stroked instead of being forced to recognize their own wrongdoings.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement because as people tailor their media profiles the more limited the information they see becomes and that's most likely preferred because who doesn't like being agreed with.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this staement because everyone has their own political view, and can choose where they get their information from. They can watch news stations that have similar view points and follow politicians/candidates who are members of the same party and most likely on the same side of the political spectrum.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement as well. Nowadays it is easy to avoid hearing the perspective of the opposite party, to avoid frustration, etc. So, people choose to receive news from biased sources, that they agree with, and can become blind to the other sides of a story.
ReplyDeleteLike I have mentioned on previous posts, when people have the ability to choose what they see for news can result in viewing the issue from an incorrect perspective, when in reality, if they saw it happen right in front of them, they might think about something different. The medias ability to frame stories and change the context while still holding it true is one of the biggest problems.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement, because everyone is different and everyone can decide what they believe in and have their own political views and don’t have to be a follower and can watch whatever they want to watch about the side they side with on TV or the Internet.
ReplyDelete