Echo Chambers for Your News
by Christine Merser
Echo Chambers. Yet another news issue I need to adjust to? Or change? Or reject? Enough already. I know, I know. Don’t shoot the messenger.
A few years ago, I found myself in the thick of an echo chamber, though at the time, I didn’t know what it was called. It started small—just following a couple of social media accounts that aligned with my beliefs, nodding along to posts that validated my worldview. Over time, the content I consumed grew more homogeneous, all reinforcing the same narratives. It felt good to have my opinions confirmed by others. I think I felt smarter, bigger even.
Echo chambers happen when the information we consume is filtered to show us what we already believe. Social media algorithms are designed to keep us hooked, and they do this by showing us more of what we “like”—which often means content that confirms our existing opinions. It’s a tricky situation because it feels like we’re being informed, but in reality, we’re just hearing the same messages over and over again, amplified by the chamber around us.
Here are a few key aspects of how the echo chamber phenomenon manifests on social media:
Algorithmic Filtering: Social media algorithms are designed to keep users engaged by showing content that resonates with them. This can result in a feedback loop, where users see content that reinforces their pre-existing beliefs, and the algorithm continues serving similar content based on their interactions.
Selective Exposure: People tend to follow, friend, or engage with others who share their viewpoints. Over time, this creates a homogenous environment where diverse opinions are less likely to surface. And, where the credibility those you follow have, allow disinformation to be read as accurate when it is not.
Confirmation Bias: In echo chambers, individuals are more likely to accept information that confirms their beliefs and reject contradictory evidence, leading to a skewed understanding of reality.
We’re wasting time reading the same POV over and over again, just like that friend who tells the same story over and over again. I know I do that sometimes. Note to self.
In addition, we are enlarging disinformation. Making more money for the platforms that are not serving us well. Time to deal with it.
Like it or not, the best way to move this country along is to challenge your own point of view and not waste time confirming over and over and over again your own beliefs, getting increasingly angry at the ‘other side’ and wasting a boatload of time learning absolutely nothing.
Action Items:
1. Follow People Who Disagree With You
I know, it sounds uncomfortable. But one of the best things I did was start following accounts and subscribing to news sources that I knew I wouldn’t always agree with. It wasn’t easy at first. Some opinions made me mad, others made me question my own views, but it also broadened my perspective. I started to understand how other people saw the world and why they believed what they did. This doesn’t mean I agreed with them all, but I could appreciate the complexity of issues more clearly. And, rereading this paragraph, I sound like I have gotten this under control, which I haven’t but at least I see it now.
2. Check the Source—And Then Check Again
It’s easy to read something that supports your viewpoint and accept it as fact. But one thing I’ve learned is that when it comes to important topics, I need to dig deeper. Now, I make it a habit to check where the information is coming from. Who’s behind the article? What’s their agenda? Is there a bias? And then I cross-check with a different source to see if the information holds up. Sometimes I’ll find that something I took as fact was actually skewed to fit a certain narrative. And that’s okay—recognizing it helps me stay grounded in reality.
Here’s a list of well-known conservative journalists who are generally regarded for adhering to journalistic integrity and who do not typically engage in spreading disinformation. Follow at least two of them. The lower list are lesser known journalists.
1. David Brooks – New York Times
David Brooks is a moderate conservative who writes for The New York Times and is known for his thoughtful analysis on politics, culture, and society.
2. George F. Will – Washington Post
George Will is a Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist for The Washington Post and is respected for his conservative viewpoints on economics and government while maintaining factual integrity.
3. Kathleen Parker – Washington Post
Kathleen Parker writes for The Washington Post and offers a conservative perspective, often focusing on social issues and politics, without resorting to misinformation.
4. Ross Douthat – New York Times
Ross Douthat is a conservative opinion columnist for The New York Times and is known for his intellectual approach to conservatism, particularly on social and cultural matters.
5. Mona Charen – The Bulwark
Mona Charen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and writes for The Bulwark. She has been a critic of disinformation within right-wing media and focuses on principled conservatism.
6. Jonah Goldberg – The Dispatch
Jonah Goldberg is one of the founders of The Dispatch, a conservative media outlet committed to fact-based journalism. He also writes for National Review.
7. Peggy Noonan – Wall Street Journal
A former speechwriter for Ronald Reagan, Peggy Noonan writes for The Wall Street Journal and offers conservative views on politics, culture, and governance, grounded in careful analysis.
8. Bret Stephens – New York Times
Bret Stephens, a columnist for The New York Times, is a conservative voice on foreign policy and climate skepticism, though he generally engages in nuanced arguments rather than misinformation.
These journalists provide thoughtful conservative commentary while upholding journalistic standards, contributing to the broader political conversation without relying on disinformation.
Here are five additional conservative journalists, lesser known, who uphold journalistic integrity and are not affiliated with The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, or The Washington Post:
1. Ramesh Ponnuru – National Review
Ramesh Ponnuru is a senior editor at National Review and a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion. He offers conservative perspectives on a range of topics, particularly on politics and health care, while maintaining a commitment to fact-based discourse.
2. Charles C.W. Cooke – National Review
Charles C.W. Cooke is a writer for National Review and is known for his libertarian-leaning conservative views. He is a vocal critic of disinformation and focuses on promoting reasoned arguments on gun rights, free speech, and individual liberty.
3. David French – The Dispatch
David French, a senior editor at The Dispatch, is a conservative writer and commentator who has been a strong advocate for the rule of law, civil liberties, and principled conservatism. He is also a critic of conspiracy theories and disinformation.
4. Ben Shapiro – The Daily Wire
Ben Shapiro, co-founder of The Daily Wire, is a well-known conservative commentator who focuses on cultural and political issues. While he engages in sharp critiques of liberal policies, he strives to support his arguments with facts and does not typically spread disinformation.
5. S.E. Cupp – CNN / The Bulwark
S.E. Cupp is a conservative political commentator who hosts a show on CNN and writes for The Bulwark. She often focuses on issues of faith, politics, and conservatism while maintaining a fact-based approach to her arguments, especially in her criticism of disinformation within the political right.
These journalists contribute to the conservative media landscape with integrity, challenging both their own side and the opposition while steering clear of disinformation.The echo chamber phenomenon in social media refers to the tendency of users to encounter information and opinions that align with their existing beliefs, while filtering out or ignoring opposing perspectives. This happens due to algorithms on platforms like Facebook, Twitter (now X), Instagram, and others, which prioritize showing content that matches users' past behavior, interests, and social connections. The result is that users are often "echoing" their own views or those of like-minded people back and forth, reinforcing their opinions rather than being exposed to a diversity of ideas.