The problem with blaming bubbles is that it's not new to social media. I would image it goes as far back as tribal evolution, but I digress. Currently, if some

The problem with blaming bubbles is that it's not new to social media. I would image it goes as far back as tribal evolution, but I digress. Currently, if someone like conservative politics, they read conservative newspapers and magazines, watch conservative news, listen to conservative radio and go to conservative websites, because they like it. There are liberal versions of these and also middle-of-the-road versions. Social media is just another way of consuming information that you like. Another dimension is wether said information is accurate or not. This has also been a historical problem in this country and the world, probably since we, as a species, have been writing stuff down and even before in oral histories. Information in social media is consumed from friends and acquaintances. People tend to give more authority to the validity of information from friends and acquaintances, again throughout history. Social media isn't inherently bad for society, I think politics is bad for society and social media is just another way of sharing ideas, good and bad. Again, most of this is nothing new, including the content. Look up Andrew Jackson's 1828 campaign against his wife: According to Ann Toplovich, executive director of the Tennessee Historical Society, John Quincy Adams' presidential campaigns targeted Jackson's "passion and lack of self-control" in both 1824 and 1828, "making it central to the argument that he would devastate the integrity of the Republic and its institutions."[6] One newspaper ran an article asking, “‘Ought a convicted adulteress and her paramour husband to be placed in the highest offices of this free and Christian land?’”