Scan barcode
msand3's review
4.0
4.5 stars. The primary argument in this book is that the current American media environment is not polarized (i.e., a symmetric division of co-equal, differing positions) but instead includes a fringe right-wing bubble encased in a propaganda feedback loop with no way to check their self-reinforcing views, set against a traditional media environment of centrist journalists and left-wing partisans who are concerned with fact-checking that resists the spread of misinformation. Whereas falsehoods, misinformation, and disinformation are tamped down and corrected in the traditional media and on the partisan left (the “reality-check dynamic”), they are amplified and built into the system as “design features of the network” on the right. Any attempt on to the right to use facts to correct such false information is punished.
The result is that media sources on the right identify and propagate “identity confirmation” rather than truth. Instead of factual checks, their audience is offered an echo chamber of misinformation. The authors refer to this as the “propaganda feedback loop.”
The authors come to this conclusion based on analyses of clicks and links into and out of Facebook, twitter, and blogs, using a huge number of graphs to present their findings. This is a long, detailed book, and sometimes it gets a little repetitive, but ultimately the authors succeed in making their case. My one minor criticism is that many of the graphs include text that is so microscopically small as to be impossible to read. Even when tracking down the free Open Access version of the book and zooming in, some of the text is impossible to read for all the smaller nodules in the graphs. But this is a minor criticism, since the point of the graphs is to highlight the major connections (which can be easily read) and to present a visually dynamic version of the collated evidence. In this case, the authors are also successful.
Recommended for anyone interested in propaganda in the Trump age, political rhetoric, and media studies in general.
The result is that media sources on the right identify and propagate “identity confirmation” rather than truth. Instead of factual checks, their audience is offered an echo chamber of misinformation. The authors refer to this as the “propaganda feedback loop.”
The authors come to this conclusion based on analyses of clicks and links into and out of Facebook, twitter, and blogs, using a huge number of graphs to present their findings. This is a long, detailed book, and sometimes it gets a little repetitive, but ultimately the authors succeed in making their case. My one minor criticism is that many of the graphs include text that is so microscopically small as to be impossible to read. Even when tracking down the free Open Access version of the book and zooming in, some of the text is impossible to read for all the smaller nodules in the graphs. But this is a minor criticism, since the point of the graphs is to highlight the major connections (which can be easily read) and to present a visually dynamic version of the collated evidence. In this case, the authors are also successful.
Recommended for anyone interested in propaganda in the Trump age, political rhetoric, and media studies in general.
sakaerka's review against another edition
2.0
Unlike Benkler's previous writings, this book does not add anything but intense elaboration of already existing knowledge.
redbecca's review against another edition
5.0
This is the best book I have read so far on the interaction between right wing politics and media. The authors adopt a relatively neutral tone, are scrupulously transparent in describing their methods, and offer insights hard to find elsewhere. The authors admirably avoid hyperbolic narratives about Russian influence, the Alt-right, commercial algorithms and "internet echo chambers" while demonstrating the ways in which all of these factors are currently at play.
steve_t's review against another edition
4.0
A really interesting book that taught me something about the American media landscape.
The first third of the book I found the most informative, but it is all worth reading.
Mostly about how right wing media do not have built in, fact checking mechanisms in their landscape
While the left is more integrated with the centre, reinforced by journalistic practices
Refreshing to see direct language that calls out certain organizations and individuals
The ending surprised me since they promote truth seeking institutions, but warn against left-wing criticism of objectivity
Which I think is a bit contradictory
Also, kinda surprised that 538 and NPR are described a left wing rather than in the middle
I wonder if I am biased :P
Overall though
A book worth reading for people who fell into an existential political abyss after the 2016 election, like me.
The first third of the book I found the most informative, but it is all worth reading.
Mostly about how right wing media do not have built in, fact checking mechanisms in their landscape
While the left is more integrated with the centre, reinforced by journalistic practices
Refreshing to see direct language that calls out certain organizations and individuals
The ending surprised me since they promote truth seeking institutions, but warn against left-wing criticism of objectivity
Which I think is a bit contradictory
Also, kinda surprised that 538 and NPR are described a left wing rather than in the middle
I wonder if I am biased :P
Overall though
A book worth reading for people who fell into an existential political abyss after the 2016 election, like me.
emilesnyder's review against another edition
This was both a horrible book to take in as an audiobook and desperately needed a more ruthless editor. The combination made it a struggle for me to finish.
I think some of the takeaways are sound: they way that extreme right wing partisan media has gone in the US is different in kind from what exists on the left, the split has been gestating at least since Regan, and is not really the result of the existence of the internet, neither purely monetarily motivated nor politically motivated bot/sockpuppet attempts to manipulate the 2016 election were likely to have had a statistically significant effect.
I wish it had spent more time engaging with the psychological factors for individuals caught in the "propaganda feedback loop", as well as engaging more seriously with the line between the (aggressive) critique of mainstream media from the left and the right wing propaganda network's "critique" of mainstream media.
I think some of the takeaways are sound: they way that extreme right wing partisan media has gone in the US is different in kind from what exists on the left, the split has been gestating at least since Regan, and is not really the result of the existence of the internet, neither purely monetarily motivated nor politically motivated bot/sockpuppet attempts to manipulate the 2016 election were likely to have had a statistically significant effect.
I wish it had spent more time engaging with the psychological factors for individuals caught in the "propaganda feedback loop", as well as engaging more seriously with the line between the (aggressive) critique of mainstream media from the left and the right wing propaganda network's "critique" of mainstream media.