IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socres/v23y2018i3p637-654.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Redefining Filter Bubbles as (Escapable) Socio-Technical Recursion

Author

Listed:
  • Huw C Davies

Abstract

Personalisation of media content is not a new phenomenon. Now, however, by configuring our search results and data feeds, algorithms that ‘learn’ from our digital footprint are determining what we see and hear. Pariser calls this the ‘Filter Bubble Effect’. Yet, despite concerns that this effect is a threat to deliberative democracy, we are told there is relatively little evidence to substantiate its existence. This article draws on a case study to argue that this is because the existing research looks for technical effects while neglecting our social lives. If we follow Foucault’s reasoning that systems of thought are also technologies, then we can see that material technologies (or what Foucault called ‘technologies of production’) and immaterial technologies (ideas formed in discourse) can co-constitute filter bubbles. Borrowing language from computing and science and technology studies, this leads to a redefinition of filter bubbles as socio-technical recursion. This case study illustrates just one potential combination of such material and immaterial technologies (namely, search engines and ideas that are encountered and formed during an individual’s social life within their culture and class) that can create socio-technical recursion. The article concludes by arguing the advantage of conceptualising filter bubbles in this way is that it offers us a theoretical foundation for breaking out of this recursion by simultaneously challenging the mediums and messages that sustain them.

Suggested Citation

  • Huw C Davies, 2018. "Redefining Filter Bubbles as (Escapable) Socio-Technical Recursion," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 23(3), pages 637-654, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:23:y:2018:i:3:p:637-654
    DOI: 10.1177/1360780418763824
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1360780418763824
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1360780418763824?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonathan Albright, 2017. "Welcome to the Era of Fake News," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 87-89.
    2. Zuiderveen Borgesius, Frederik J. & Trilling, Damian & Möller, Judith & Bodó, Balázs & de Vreese, Claes H. & Helberger, Natali, 2016. "Should we worry about filter bubbles?," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 5(1), pages 1-16.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Natalie-Anne Hall, 2022. "Understanding Brexit on Facebook: Developing Close-up, Qualitative Methodologies for Social Media Research," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 27(3), pages 707-723, September.
    2. Stefan Angel, 2022. "Dimensionen von Digitalisierung der Sozialpolitik in Österreich. Ein konzeptioneller Diskussionsbeitrag," WIFO Working Papers 642, WIFO.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Theodora A. Maniou & Andreas Veglis, 2020. "Employing a Chatbot for News Dissemination during Crisis: Design, Implementation and Evaluation," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-14, June.
    2. Guohui Song & Yongbin Wang, 2021. "Mainstream Value Information Push Strategy on Chinese Aggregation News Platform: Evolution, Modelling and Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Germano, Fabrizio & Sobbrio, Francesco, 2020. "Opinion dynamics via search engines (and other algorithmic gatekeepers)," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    4. Ryan Suttle & Scott Hogan & Rachel Aumaugher & Matthew Spradling & Zak Merrigan & Jeremy Straub, 2022. "Deceptive Content Labeling Survey Data from Two U.S. Midwestern Universities," Data, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-10, February.
    5. DeMora, Stephanie L. & Granados Samayoa, Javier A. & Albarracín, Dolores, 2024. "Social media use and vaccination among Democrats and Republicans: Informational and normative influences," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 352(C).
    6. Budzinski, Oliver & Gänßle, Sophia & Lindstädt-Dreusicke, Nadine, 2021. "Data (r)evolution - The economics of algorithmic search and recommender services," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 148, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    7. Herzog, Bodo, 2019. "Optimal policy under uncertainty and rational inattention," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 444-449.
    8. Thomas E. Powell & Toni G. L. A. van der Meer & Carlos Brenes Peralta, 2019. "Picture Power? The Contribution of Visuals and Text to Partisan Selective Exposure," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 12-31.
    9. Benjamin A. Lyons, 2022. "Insidiously Trivial: Meme Format Reduces Perceived Influence and Intent to Debate Partisan Claims," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(3), pages 196-205.
    10. Matthew Spradling & Jeremy Straub, 2022. "Evaluation of the Factors That Impact the Perception of Online Content Trustworthiness by Income, Political Affiliation and Online Usage Time," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-55, November.
    11. Kris Hartley & Minh Khuong Vu, 2020. "Fighting fake news in the COVID-19 era: policy insights from an equilibrium model," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(4), pages 735-758, December.
    12. König Pascal D., 2020. "Why Digital-Era Political Marketing is Not the Death Knell for Democracy: On the Importance of Placing Political Microtargeting in the Context of Party Competition," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 87-110, June.
    13. Claudia Rodríguez-Hidalgo & Diana Rivera-Rogel & Luis M. Romero-Rodríguez, 2020. "Information Quality in Latin American Digital Native Media: Analysis Based on Structured Dimensions and Indicators," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 135-145.
    14. Pelletier, Mark J. & Horky, Alisha Blakeney & Fox, Alexa K., 2021. "Fexit: The effect of political and promotional communication from friends and family on Facebook exiting intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 321-334.
    15. Sætra, Henrik Skaug, 2019. "The tyranny of perceived opinion: Freedom and information in the era of big data," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    16. Copland, Simon, 2020. "Reddit quarantined: Can changing platform affordances reduce hateful material online?," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 9(4), pages 1-26.
    17. Sarah Eskens, 2020. "The personal information sphere: An integral approach to privacy and related information and communication rights," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(9), pages 1116-1128, September.
    18. Anna Gerbrandy, 2019. "Rethinking Competition Law within the European Economic Constitution," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 127-142, January.
    19. Marko Selakovic, 2020. "Typology of Business-Related Fake News Online: A Literature Review," GATR Journals jmmr259, Global Academy of Training and Research (GATR) Enterprise.
    20. Ari Haasio & Markku Mattila & Anu Ojaranta, 2018. "The Role of Libraries in Avoiding Hate Speech and False Information," Information and Communication Sciences Research, University of Bucharest, Faculty of Letters, Department of Communication Sciences, issue 22, pages 9-15, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:23:y:2018:i:3:p:637-654. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.