Taylor N. Carlson, "Through the Grapevine: Socially Transmitted Information and Distorted Democracy" (U Chicago Press, 2024)
Jan 26, 2025
auto_awesome
In this engaging discussion, Taylor N. Carlson, an associate professor of political science at Washington University in St. Louis, delves into the dynamics of how information spreads in today's society. He explains that a significant portion of Americans now rely on peer-to-peer communication rather than traditional media for political insights. Carlson reveals the consequences of this shift, including increased bias and misinformation, leading to distorted democratic processes. He also explores the dual impact of social conversations on public attitudes, especially regarding critical issues like immigration and environmental policy.
Socially transmitted information enhances political engagement while simultaneously increasing the spread of misinformation, challenging democratic integrity.
The shift from traditional media to peer-shared political information results in biased interpretations, contributing to polarization and distorted democracy.
Deep dives
The Nature of Socially Transmitted Information
Socially transmitted information refers to the way individuals share political information through personal interactions, often impacting political understanding and behavior. This transmission differs from traditional media, where information is presented in a more structured manner. For example, when individuals discuss news articles with peers, key details can be lost or altered, resulting in biased or incomplete accounts of the original content. These distortions can affect how people perceive political issues and candidates, as evidenced by varied interpretations of the same news article among Democrats and Republicans.
Impact on Political Knowledge and Misinformation
Social transmission of information can lead to both increased knowledge and the spread of misinformation. Individuals who receive information from knowledgeable peers may learn effectively, yet this exposure can also propagate false beliefs, as seen in experiments where participants shared inaccurate information. The complexity lies in the dual nature of these interactions, as conversations might lead to enhanced understanding while simultaneously contributing to the spread of inaccuracies. This highlights the necessity to critically evaluate the sources and content of information exchanged in social settings.
Polarization Effects of Socially Transmitted Information
Engagement with socially shared information is associated with increased political polarization, where individuals align more closely with their party's viewpoints after exposure to co-partisan information. The research indicates that this pattern can lead to extremists views based on shared biases in conversation. However, despite the increase in policy polarization, affective polarization—or emotional hostility toward the opposing party—remains unchanged, suggesting a complexity in how interpersonal discussions shape political attitudes. The moral implications of such polarization, including whether it aids or hinders democratic processes, are debated within the context of political discourse.
Engagement and the Role of Misinformation
Socially transmitted information may galvanize individuals to engage politically, as seen in self-reported data indicating higher involvement in political activities among those who receive more information through social channels. While this engagement manifests positively by mobilizing action, it concurrently promotes the spread of misinformation, influencing beliefs about the integrity of political processes, such as election fairness. The findings suggest a need for careful consideration of how social discussions can both empower political participation and contribute to cognitive biases. Thus, while social engagement can foster democratic involvement, it also risks entrenching misinformation and distorted perspectives.
Accurate information is at the heart of democratic functioning. For decades, researchers interested in how information is disseminated have focused on mass media, but the reality is that many Americans today do not learn about politics from direct engagement with the news. Rather, about one-third of Americans learn chiefly from information shared by their peers in conversation or on social media. How does this socially transmitted information differ from that communicated by traditional media? What are the consequences for political attitudes and behavior?
Drawing on evidence from experiments, surveys, and social media, in Through the Grapevine: Socially Transmitted Information and Distorted Democracy(University of Chicago Press, 2024) Dr. Taylor N. Carlson finds that, as information flows first from the media then person to person, it becomes sparse, more biased, less accurate, and more mobilizing. The result is what Carlson calls distorted democracy. Although socially transmitted information does not necessarily render democracy dysfunctional, Through the Grapevine shows how it contributes to a public that is at once underinformed, polarized, and engaged.
This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose new book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars.