The Dangers of Fragmentation

Has the explosion of new media played a role in fragmentation? If so, where is this likely to lead? (Barnouw, pg 546)

The above question is one of many posed by Barnouw at the conclusion of Tube of Plenty; it embodies one of the major concerns that came to my mind as I read his book and Gitlin's article. As I'll describe in more detail below, my concern stems from 1) an understanding of television (TV) as a psychological bond in people's understanding of the world and 2) the ability of the internet to create niche communities that bolster their own values without having to deal with arguing forces. 

I will start off on a personal note: As I've mentioned before, I am a Mexican American who came to the U.S. at the tender age of 3 years old. Several of my earliest memories are of watching TV (in English, of course) on Saturday mornings before my parents woke up; I was also known to reject meals in favor of finishing my TV-watching. In short, I grew up on TV. It was my window to the world and most importantly to the United States of America. Needless to say I was rarely represented in the shows I watched and when glimpses of Latinos showed up on the tube inevitably in cleaning lady roles or the more audacious "Speedy Gonzalez," they were dismissed by my parents as being "the other" and definitely not us (so it was a real shock when I heard my first "Hispanics clean houses" joke in high school -- nuh uh!). Clearly I was mesmerized by the power of TV at a young age. 

What I am trying to say is that my youth kind of exemplified what I read in Barnouw, that television as a medium reinforces the average person's view of the world (page 403). More importantly, it reaffirms the hegemonic status quo through a sort of 'communion' among viewers (here I'm referencing our brief religion discussion in class last week). As Gitlin states, 

...the most popular shows are those that succeed in speaking simultaneously to audiences that diverge in social class, race, gender, religion, and ideology: and this because of the mass market imperative of network television. (page 248)

Setting aside the problems that arise from this for a moment, let's consider how powerful this 'communion' can be: it can unite and elevate our society to address social injustices and inequalities, e.g., Murrow's "See it Now" take on McCarthy. 

Considering this, let's fast-forward to today where we have the internet and a plethora of news sources: we live in a world where those of us with liberal (and dare I say feminist?) tendencies prefer to read the take on news on sites where our views are lauded and applauded whereas those with more conservative tendencies flock to sites where their views are lauded and applauded. There is greater fragmentation in how we consume our news and while this may be good  for a wider dissemination of views (and for our egos), in my opinion they also breed a greater fragmentation of an already diverse society. There is less incentive for us to cooperate and compromise and so we dive further into diverging views. 

I can't say I know where this is likely to lead. I believe that the internet and emerging new media web-based platforms are powerful in many ways and that much good can come from the democratization of access to information that they provide. But I am weary of whether we can take advantage of it without proper media literacy and a well-rounded education overall...