How does social media lead to a dramatic selection effect?

3
outsiders. Anyone outside of the echo chamber is viewed as untrustworthy and members-only
trust those inside of the chamber. Social media platforms tend to filter perspectives and make
pages that align with an individual’s worldview visible. Such platforms are echo chambers. An
individual can only see things or information that align with their world views.
Why is access to opposing viewpoints not enough to escape an echo chamber?
An echo chamber does not exist because there are no opposing viewpoints; it exists and
theories because members discredit such sources. According to Nguyen, members of an echo
chamber read but do not accept; they hear but dismiss external opposing voices. Members of an
echo chamber distrust any non-member sources; thus, even if they hear them, they will not
believe in whatever information they provide. The distrust that exists then creates a social buffer
against any opposing or outside viewpoints. Members do not stick to the group because of being
isolated from the outside world. On the contrary, they are connected but have selected authorities
from whom they receive information. The presence of a few selected ad trusted sources of
information makes all other sources to be discredited. In fact, when members are exposed to
opposing perspectives, their confidence in their insider voices increases. It is like the opposing
viewpoints are catalysts that help grow the trust of echo chamber members even more.
According to Nguyen, how can a person escape from an echo chamber?
An individual can escape from an echo chamber through a social-epistemic reboot. It
entails conducting a profound deep-cleanse of a person’s belief system. It entails temporarily
suspending one’s beliefs all at once and then starting the process of gathering information all
over again. This appears unrealistic and undoable. It is hard for a person to disregard everything
they have been told or have learned ad restart the process of learning all over again. However, it
is necessary to escape from an echo chamber. It will allow an individual to start treating all

4
sources of information as trustworthy. The individual must reconsider all sources of information
and view them with a presumably equanimous eye. He or she must equally trust all sources.
However, after the reboot, the individual can now trust the sources that they want without being
narrowly confined to the way they were conditioned growing up.
Do you agree with Nguyen’s diagnosis of the problem and proposed solution? Why or why
not?
Yes, I agree with Nguyen. He clearly identifies issues in the flow of information. The two
main issues are the echo chamber and the epistemic bubble. The epistemic bubble grows fast and
easily and also bursts as fast as it comes around. It is not much of a problem. However, the one
that he concentrates on is the echo chamber. Its effects are long-lasting, and it is almost like echo
chambers have a life of their own. The solution to an echo chamber is for an individual to escape.
For this to happen, the roots, which entail trust, must be addressed. One temporarily disregards
all their trusted sources and relearn trust all over again while objectively evaluating all the
sources. Given the nature of an echo chamber, a social-epistemic reboot would be the most
viable solution. The members are kind of indoctrinated, and not unless they are shaken from the
roots, then it is almost impossible for them to get out of the chambers.