>IIRC, Facebook edits what they show you in the feed based on what you click a lot - so what you are provided with tends to be what you agree with. And other no

>IIRC, Facebook edits what they show you in the feed based on what you click a lot - so what you are provided with tends to be what you agree with. And other non-interactive material make it harder to have conversation. Lastly, I think things done online usually happen in the context of an online community that tends to anchor the conversation there - not necessarily bad, but potentially if the conversation/community is homogenous. This depends entirely on what sort of sites you visit. I agree that sites like FB and Twitter that do that are harmful and promote homogeneity. >Perhaps, but consider the following, which will be a reason to encourage off-topic conversations. You have multiple 'similar-interest groups' that you belong to that are orthogonal - my work buddies have different religious views and my fellow congregational members have different occupations than I. My friend from Australia whom I play video games with is studying to become a geophysicists. While a lot of what he learns is a bit over my head, I enjoy discussing what he is learning with him to the best of my ability. I'd consider that orthogonal. Just like you can ask your congregational members about their occupations - you can ask your online friends about theirs as well! Perhaps its a part of "internet etiquette" that people don't go off-topic as often as they might offline? I don't deny that the internet might promote homogeneous communities more-so than offline, but by no means is it a limit or barrier that cannot be passed once someone becomes aware of it and desires to change the behavior.