The origins of partisanship stretch all the way back to the founding of our nation. After the Constitutional Convention concluded in 1787, the first ever political factions were formed between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. These two parties fought primarily on one issue — the ratification of a new constitution to replace the Articles of Confederation. The Federalists won the battle, and that very Constitution would become the backbone of our nation, spelling out our country’s most important laws. During his presidency, George Washington witnessed the inklings of danger that such partisanship could cause. In his famous Farewell speech in 1796, he explicitly implored the American people to avoid political parties as they would undermine the stability of our nation. Unfortunately, his words were largely ignored as political division grew alongside our democracy. Controversial topics such as LGBTQ rights, the legalization of marijuana, gun control, and abortions are all issues that have fueled this deep divide for decades. Additionally, a plethora of new issues has sprouted such as mask mandates, the Black Lives Matter Movement, and President Trump’s unwillingness to concede the 2020 presidential election.
While debates on such issues bring a wealth of different viewpoints, they bring about more dangerous and violent consequences than benefits. Some people are so dead set on their beliefs that they won’t listen to the opposition at all. To vent out their frustration, some resort to deadly means such as the infamous Paul Hill who was a staunch anti-abortionist and murdered a doctor outside his abortion clinic. Partisanship has also drastically slowed the lawmaking process. Bills can remain stagnant for years as Congress continues to squabble and become more polarized. It’s imperative that America addresses this division and stems the damage it causes.
Today, the rise of social media further fans the growing radicalism of the left and the right, dividing America in the process. The biggest culprit would have to be Facebook which also owns Instagram. Both of these apps share a similar platform, have a massive user base, and allow users to comment under other users’ posts. These comment sections should better be referred to as “Online Microenvironments” and are the crux of this expanding problem.
It’s obvious that certain news organizations have biased political beliefs and tend to lean in a specific direction. For example, Fox champions the right while CNN defends the left. Both organizations frequently disseminate information on these social media platforms. The most dangerous part is the comment section that accompanies each new post they put out. Users will most likely comment something that sides with the beliefs of the respective organization. Anyone that comments opposing ideas will be brutally harassed. Degrading comments ranging from “Stupid” to “You should be killed” are the gamut of hurtful words used to attack anyone with different ideas. With such savage attacks, it makes sense that these comment sections are extremely one-sided and don’t feature any contrasting viewpoints.
During the 2020 election, Fox News’ comment sections were flooded with “Trump 2020.” Anyone who dared to write “Biden 2020” or supported another candidate would have thousands of netizens coming after them with the most insulting attacks imaginable. The inability to post alternate perspectives without severe repercussions causes users in these microenvironments to become oblivious to alternative points of view and intolerable to any dissent. Additionally, due to mob mentality, most users will tend to disparage the other users rather than debate about the issue at hand. If users constantly see people bashing others, they will be much more likely to participate in it as well. This deep anger and hostility breeding among these microenvironments could segue from online trash talk to violent crime in the physical world.
Without doubt, microenvironments are dangerous to a civil society.
Today, a good portion of online users have extremist ideas. When CNN reported that Trump came down with COVID, most users hoped he would learn from the severity of the virus and double down on America’s response to the disease. However, certain comments wished for Trump’s immediate death. These remarks flourished in these microenvironments due to a lack of opposition and support from fellow extremists. As soon as these comments receive a couple of likes from other like-minded extremists, they float to the top of the comment section where they are most visible. Most moderate users will be initially shocked at such comments; however, that surprise quickly vanishes. Since these comments are at the top, people will think that these are appropriate messages. Additionally, they might even like the comments after seeing twenty other folks like them. What started as a few statements by a small band of extremists has now desensitized the average user and fooled them into considering such statements as suitable messages. The lack of users with dissenting viewpoints allows this problematic process to continue unhindered. The extreme suddenly becomes the moderate. These microenvironments cause users to unconsciously tread further to the endpoints of the vast political spectrum, straining the unity among Americans.
Companies such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter utilize advanced algorithms to personalize user experience, but they’re also introducing similar microenvironments to users every time they log on. For instance, if a user were to follow and like most of Fox News’ content, it would show them more posts from other right leaning organizations and personalities such as Breitbart News or Ben Shapiro. These algorithms strap users into a sphere of influence in which one-sided microenvironments reign supreme and all differing viewpoints are shunted. With America being tugged further to the left and right, such tensions are destroying our nation’s core values.
Solutions to this issue are sparse but must be thought of soon. An obvious choice would be to ban the comment section on all political accounts. However, that would only bring about more anger and division. Critics would argue that such a ban infringes upon their first amendment rights to free speech, a core tenet of our Constitution. A more viable solution would be to require these tech titans to modify their existing algorithms. They should eliminate the like button on individual comments, preventing many users from falling into the mob mentality trap. Additionally, these companies should lessen the effectiveness of their personalization algorithms. Rather than flood news feeds with only right or left wing sources, they should always show posts that cover the wide spectrum of viewpoints. Users will be nudged to look at multiple perspectives. This will hopefully decrease extremist sentiments, encourage Americans to consider other standpoints, and potentially modify existing prejudices. By tackling these online microenvironments, America can slowly mitigate the vicious problem of partisanship and move towards unity.
