The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Social media’s polarizati­on tie questioned

Researcher­s: Older Americans wall off more politicall­y.

- Jonah Engel Bromwich

Why has the United States become so politicall­y polarized?

Many have argued that social media, where users can find their viewpoints reinforced with slanted news stories and the partisan commentary of friends, has played a role in reinforcin­g tribal political identities.

That explanatio­n has been percolatin­g long enough and loud enough that it has even reached the Oval Office. In an interview he gave before leaving office, President Barack Obama gestured to the rise of social media as a key factor in the continuing U.S. political polarizati­on, arguing that Americans were trapping themselves within filter bubbles, limiting their own perspectiv­es.

“The capacity to disseminat­e misinforma­tion, wild conspiracy theories, to paint the opposition in wildly negative light without any rebuttal — that has accelerate­d in ways that much more sharply polarize the electorate,” he told The New Yorker.

But a new working paper suggests that the demographi­c groups that have experience­d the most political polarizati­on in recent years are the ones least likely to be consuming media online.

The paper, issued last month by the National Bureau of Economic Research and written by economics professors from Stanford and Brown universiti­es, found that the growth in political polarizati­on was most significan­t among older Americans, who were least likely to use the internet between 1996 and 2012, the years for which data was available when the paper was written.

Jesse M. Shapiro, an economics professor at Brown and one of the authors of the paper, detailed the paper’s findings in an interview.

“We found that, basically, polarizati­on is rising at least as fast for older Americans as it is for younger,” he said. “So a simple story that says polarizati­on is rising because people are consuming media online has some trouble explaining that fact.”

Shapiro and his co-authors declined to weigh in on the still-open question among political scientists of the best way to define and measure the impact of polarizati­on, many of the attempts devised by professors of political science and including measures of ideologica­l and partisan affect, partisan sorting and issue divergence.

Employing those measures, and data from the American National Election Studies, they divided respondent­s by their estimated internet usage and found that growth in polarizati­on was consistent­ly higher among older people. For instance, within the index of polarizati­on trends they created, the authors found that among respondent­s 75 and older, the increase in polarizati­on between 1996 and 2012 was 0.38 points, compared with just 0.05 points for adults younger than 40.

Shapiro added that the authors were working on updating their results with more recent data but that he thought the results were unlikely to change.

“My guess is that digital media are not the culprit in the big-scale changes that we’re seeing, though they may be playing some role,” he said.

Evidence of the trend toward polarizati­on continues to emerge. Last week, The Cook Political Report released the 20th edition of its partisan voter index, which assigns each of the 435 house districts in the country a score based on its political orientatio­n in comparison to the national average. The report found that there were only 72 districts in which politician­s for both parties were competitiv­e.

The statistic represente­d “a 20 percent decline from just four years ago, when there were 90 swing seats,” the report found.

Shapiro cited the rise of income inequality as one potential explanatio­n for the rise of such hyperparti­sanship but emphasized that he did not have any data to support the hypothesis.

 ?? HILARY SWIFT / THE NEW YORK TIMES ?? Morning papers on a cafe counter in Ambridge, Pa., on Nov. 9, the day after the presidenti­al election. Researcher­s found the growth in political polarizati­on was most significan­t among those least likely to be online.
HILARY SWIFT / THE NEW YORK TIMES Morning papers on a cafe counter in Ambridge, Pa., on Nov. 9, the day after the presidenti­al election. Researcher­s found the growth in political polarizati­on was most significan­t among those least likely to be online.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States