There is no question that in our digital age we find ourselves falling into information traps, where our information sources are restricted to certain perspectives and biases, and our own biases are reinforced. I call these traps digital hollows, and they are unavoidable, but we can try to think beyond them if we remain cognizant of our own entrapment. The recent case of Joel Tenenbaum and his jury judgment of $675,000 for copyright infringement may provide some evidence of that fact, it seems.

The blog “the scholarly kitchen” points to the large jury verdicts in both the Tenenbaum and Thomas cases and suggests that perhaps the average Jane or Joe isn’t as rabidly hostile to copyright as one might think by spending some time online:

But what’s really interesting to me is that the jurors chose such high figures in the first place. I spend a lot of time keeping an eye on copyright issues, particularly the way new technologies are having an effect on copyright holders and users of copyrighted material. The general consensus online is that our copyright system is broken, that it is being abused by copyright holders, that the RIAA is the root of all evil, and that consumers have lost all respect for copyright, evidenced by the widespread swapping of music files online. The verdicts awarded are making me realize that perhaps I’ve spent too much time inside the internet echo chamber.

I think we all have.

It makes sense we would see such disproportion online, when those who have a beef with the restrictions naturally resulting from copyright are most likely those consumed with digital activity. And the reinforcing mechanisms are all there. Look at any blog taking up this “cause” and you’ll see a matrix of cross links that would make Neo dizzy. The same occurs in the academic literature of Free Culture professors.

This Internet echo chamber referenced above follows trends long identified by social scientists. As we filter the overwhelming information in our digital age, we create our own personal stream of “knowledge.” It then is compounded by a phenomenon called group polarization, where biases become reinforced by “trusted” voices. The problem then spreads due to what is called a social cascade. We believe the messenger, and now the two of us – the messenger and me – pass it on to another, who has even more reason to believe it.

At that point, alternate points of view are not only not heard, they are rejected with vehemence, for they threaten our entire trust network of information.

This is what gives us the birthers.

Most of those in the digital hollow who embrace unauthorized file transfers dwell likely won’t read this blog post, and if they do, they may react with hostility, as sociologists would predict. But they are not, I believe, as numerous in general society as they appear online. I agree with the scholarly chef quoted above that these two jury verdicts suggest that very fact.

Oh, and as to how the chef hears that the RIAA is the root of all evil, it is in fact Twitter.

Share this:

This entry was posted on Thursday, August 6th, 2009 at 3:48 pm by Patrick Ross and is filed under Obama, blogging, copyright law, copyright opponents, creators, culture, internet, p2p, piracy. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.