Taylor N. Carlson, "Through the Grapevine: Socially Transmitted Information and Distorted Democracy" (U Chicago Press, 2024)
Jan 26, 2025
auto_awesome
In this enlightening discussion, Taylor N. Carlson, an associate professor of political science at Washington University in St. Louis, unpacks the concept of socially transmitted information. She reveals how peer conversations and social media shape political attitudes, often leading to misinformation and polarization. Drawing from various studies, Carlson argues that this 'distorted democracy' can leave citizens underinformed yet engaged. The conversation emphasizes the need for media literacy and critical thinking in an era dominated by social networks.
Social transmission of information can lead to biased and sparsely communicated political narratives that distort democratic engagement and understanding.
While increased political participation arises from socially shared information, it often stems from misinterpretations rather than informed decision-making.
Deep dives
The Role of Social Transmission in Information Sharing
Social transmission of information occurs through conversations, whether in person or via digital platforms. When news articles are discussed among friends or on social media, the original content can be altered significantly, leading to sparse and biased information. For instance, one individual might simplify a complex report on immigration policy while another might emphasize aspects that align with their political beliefs, thereby creating divergent narratives. Such distortions not only reduce the accuracy of the information shared but can also lead to misunderstandings and different perceptions of the same news item.
Impact of Information Distortion on Political Engagement
Distortions in information directly affect political engagement and attitudes. Individuals exposed to biased or sparsely communicated information may become more politically active, engaging in actions like protesting or contacting legislators. However, this engagement often emerges from distorted understandings of political issues rather than informed decision-making. Although increased political participation might be seen as a positive outcome, the quality and accuracy of that information are critical for fostering genuinely effective democratic engagement.
Polarization and Its Link to Socially Transmitted Information
The study reveals that socially transmitted information contributes to political polarization, as individuals are more likely to adopt extreme views that align with their party after receiving partisan information. Conversations among co-partisans foster stronger allegiance to party lines, which can ultimately lead to a more divided electorate. While this forms clearer distinctions between political beliefs, it can also exacerbate societal tensions and hinder compromise. Understanding these dynamics is essential in evaluating whether polarization serves to clarify political choices or creates barriers to governance.
Misinformation: The Double-Edged Sword of Social Interaction
Misinformation spreads alongside the transmission of information, creating challenges for democratic engagement. The research indicates that socially transmitted information can lead to a slight increase in the likelihood of believing misinformation among those who only receive information from friends rather than the news. This duality highlights the challenge of distinguishing between being uninformed and misinformed, as conversations that generate knowledge may also inadvertently spread inaccuracies. Striking a balance between the benefits of social interactions and the risks of misinformation is vital for maintaining a healthy democratic discourse.
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.