Now more than ever, we are able to listen only to what we want to hear; we only read news that conforms to our expectations; we only engage on social platforms with others who fit into our worldview. Information has never been more readily available, and we are taking advantage of it not to become more informed, but to build up walls around our custom version of reality.
Misplaced Loyalty?
You see this in a quiet way in the form of brand loyalty. Consumers who make the choice to buy a particular brand naturally want to believe their choice was wise. Their brand loyalty becomes a shield against all other brands competing in the same space. By ignoring competing claims, say a better detergent or a more nutritious frozen pizza, consumers can focus instead on whatever they like about their chosen brand, and rest assured that they made the best choice.
On the individual scale, this may simply mean you stop learning to some extent. You dismiss new brands and products, as you already know your’s is best. You ignore new television shows or news sites, because you already have a source you trust. When you close not only your mind, but your social networks, new sources, and entertainment choices, there is little opportunity for new ideas to take hold.
But multiply this phenomenon by an entire internet-connected population, and the stage is set for social stagnation–or, in an election year, extreme partisanship.
Tribes of Minds
Anywhere you look online, you are doomed to find some commentary on at least one presidential candidate–and typically, by extension, a whole political party, voting bloc, region, or other demographic group.
And like any gang of fans hoping to see their team win, partisan blocs cropping up on social media can talk a big game about whatever issue or individual is being contested. Banding together like this–even online–reinforces identities, and builds a sense of community, however informal. But it can also disrupt discourse, and prevent good ideas from reaching the other side intact. By blocking friends and followers based on their differing views or identities, social media also enables people to stop thinking critically about their own opinions, assumptions, and understanding of the world.
Social media is a staple of political campaigns today in much the same way soap boxes and and tri-colored posters have been for decades. But rather than supporting discourse, it is often used to mobilize voters–lest they be outnumbered at the polls by the opposition.
Just because social media and online platforms provide tools for this, doesn’t mean it is a problem unique to the internet. Remember, brand loyalty has existed far longer than Facebook or Reddit. The internet has merely magnified these cognitive biases, given them greater scale and influence, and disguised them in ubiquity. We can hardly stop using the internet simply because we are afraid of bias. So what defense do we have in a digital age?
Big Data to the Rescue?
Big Data has become a poorly understood buzzword, proffered as the solution to all sorts of problems whether it applies or not. But in the case of the internet and cognitive bias, it may actually be the best way to turn a problem into its own solution.
In many cases, the facts are out there, already accessible online. Our individual selection and confirmation biases may stop us from seeking more information when our minds are already made up–but we can charge computers and algorithms with looking deeper into important questions.
To return to the brand loyalty example: if you’ve already decided which brand you support, it is easy to acknowledge positive online reviews that reinforce that opinion and disregard negative write-ups. A Big Data analysis, on the other hand, can be designed to look at all relevant reviews, and give you a mathematical assessment of just how many positive vs negative reviews are out there. For extra clarity, the algorithm can weed out authentic reviews from trolls or sponsored feedback, based on certain language criteria, to offer a more unbiased look at what brand really satisfies the most people.
Add some consumer reports, manufacturer data, or other information to round out the report, and you are well-armed to challenge your assumptions and gain a more objective perspective.
The Big Questions
That’s all well and good for shoppers, but what about the polarized political environment? Can Big Data help stop the shouting match and get leaders to support good ideas–regardless of where they come from?
President Obama certainly seems to think so. His administration quietly began to integrate Big Data analytics into the White House, creating a new Office of Data Science charged with crunching numbers and examining data on a scale that helps dilute or eliminate political bias. It is an evolving mission, but one that could help ensure that regardless of which party holds the presidency, decisions are informed by more than hand-picked staff and partisan allies.
As the Office of Data Science demonstrates, the technical skills and hardware necessary to put Big Data to work in answering difficult questions is still highly specialized. While mobile apps and myriad online communities make it ever easier to indulge our biases, we have a long way to go yet before analytics have a similarly entrenched accessibility and utility.
But someday–perhaps sooner than you expect–it might be just as easy to separate facts and opinions online as it is to cherry-pick friends and followers on social media.
from Darlene Milligan http://ift.tt/1VETtJB via transformational marketing
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1plFElb
No comments:
Post a Comment