Here at Wimbledon High, some of us share views on politics, ethics, and morality and, let’s be honest, are not exactly renowned for our collective ability to keep quiet on them. So, I feel fairly confident in saying that a lot of us have similar thoughts on ‘right’ and ‘wrong’. For example, there is a large group who are, politically, slightly left leaning. I cannot exclude myself from this group of people, nor do I wish to. However, most of my political views hugely reshaped themselves since I downloaded the popular social media app TikTok, and I’m sure that many of you have also been heavily influenced by social media; be it, like me, TikTok, or your friends reposting posts on Instagram, or Twitter. Not to mention many of us share similar ideas about a particular way of thinking. Furthermore, while a tight knit group of students who all feel a particular way can be comforting, can it lead to a harsh intolerance of ideas that don’t resonate with our own? So, is this influence, both of social media and our peers, positive? Or does it encourage the exact exclusion and narrow mindedness that we, as Wimbledon High girls, seem so opposed to?
The definition of an echo chamber is: “an environment in which a person encounters only beliefs or opinions that coincide with their own, so that their existing views are reinforced, and alternative ideas are not considered.” Now, it is somewhat inevitable that many of us would share pretty similar views on many things, with a large part of us being born into middle class families, attending a very feminist and proactive school, some of us from the tender age of four. It is natural that similar circumstances would raise similar points of agreement. However, the rise of social media has resulted in our opinions becoming more public than ever before, meaning that we now know exactly what most people in our sphere think. This can, even subconsciously, lead to a pressure to agree with your peers. We begin to view opinions as facts, as ethics, as right and wrong. It is fair to say that some of us are unable to distinguish topics like homophobia, which is clearly wrong regardless of political leaning or opinion, from political leanings. An oppressive mindset, which silences people in our sphere with differing opinions and reinforces the sense that everyone believes it, makes us even more sure that we are “right”. This vicious cycle discourages debate and discussion on these important matters and leaves us comfortable in our little world where everyone agrees with us. This leads to the potential that when we encounter other influences outside our school or social group, we rankle harshly at the notion that anyone could hold any alternative view, reacting disproportionately and in a way that might, dare I say it, undermine our intellectual ability and credibility. If we want to be taken seriously in external conversation, we, of course, do not have to neglect our views and bend to the ideas of others, but we must become accustomed to hearing, considering and accepting them.
Many of us have become “Instagram Activists,” an expression coined in perhaps a slightly wry and cynical manner. I am sure you have heard people question “what is it going to do?” or “it’s not helping anything” regarding social media activism but I beg to differ. Instagram posts are hugely influential to all of us, because as much as we all like to think we are strong minded and independent, we can be massively swayed by the opinions of our peers. Instagram posts on stories do spread awareness, but they also clearly show our values. For example, I know that ‘Emily’ thinks that human trafficking is a very important issue. I also know that ‘James’ thinks Chelsea’s victory against Manchester City is a very important issue. Not to mention the fact that the algorithm feeds into this idea of an echo chamber. When we like posts we agree with, the algorithm shows us more posts with the same message so that we like more of them, so get shown more of them to like and so on. For instance, in America, when Donald Trump was elected, those against him and those for him were exposed to vastly different news. The Republicans were shown news sources, such as Fox News, that vilified the Democrats and those who were left leaning, glorifying Trump, which only strengthened their already formed opinions. The Democrats and those anti Trump were shown news of all the awful things he said and were exposed to news sources, like CNN, which reinforced what they already thought. This increased the division in America over the US election by creating two very tight knit camps who essentially despised the other. The US became so divided that many people refused to be friends with the “other camp,” exclusively surrounding themselves with people who agreed with them. And whilst Trump, in my opinion, was an awful leader with extremely flawed values and I strongly disagree with those who support him, a lot of the time his supporters were simply ignorant of a lot of the news that the Democrats saw. As they never saw it (because they were surrounded by opinions that were all very pro Trump) it was very easy for Trump to dismiss it as “fake news”. After all, if it was real why weren’t they hearing about it?
As I write this article, I am painfully aware of being slightly hypocritical. Indeed: nine months ago, on New Year’s Eve, I stormed off after a row at the dinner table over Margaret Thatcher (which I still get mocked for to this day.) However, I am comforted by the knowledge that politics is always a sensitive subject, and one that people feel very strongly about. It manages to evoke a possibly mildly childish, reaction in the best of us. So, to some degree, I think it’s fair to say many of us tend to surround ourselves with people who think the same thing and strengthen our own ideas. Perhaps it combats a sense of insecurity, a fear of being wrong that is in all of us. Perhaps it is a manifestation of the need to find similarities with people in order to make connections. It is undoubtedly a natural thing; however, I feel it has been hugely magnified by social media.
So, is this one minded approach healthy? After all, I certainly feel a sense of comfort and security in the knowledge that when I talk about politics to my friends, I feel sure they will agree with me. I certainly enjoy feeling self-assured in my views, knowing I’m unlikely to be criticised for them, because everyone around me also thinks the same thing. But I can’t help but wonder if that defeats the purpose of opinions: are we meant to wander through life in our cosy circle of security unchallenged and inconsiderate of any ideas differing from our own? And does this collective view, as “accepting” and politically correct as it seems, actually foster more exclusion and division than if we nurtured alternative points of view and encouraged discussion that didn’t end in “you’re wrong” or, in my case, storming off and locking yourself in your room for the rest of the night. I wonder if, as we all embark on our civil discourse programme, we will take a step back and realise that we are in an extremely one minded environment, and that perhaps our views are not all entirely shared by the majority. We must learn to stand firm by our beliefs, but not to shun others with opposing ones.
