This obviously isn't an original observation but I still think almost everyone is underestimating how much the Internet drives polarization on every controversial topic.

People with pro-Israel sympathies go on social media and see 24/7 coverage of antisemitic violence. People with pro-Palestinian sympathies go on social media and see 24/7 coverage of violence against Palestinians in Gaza or elsewhere.

This not only causes people to dig in on their existing biases, a small minority gets radicalized and engages in further violence. And once again this mainly gets seen by people on the other side of the debate.

Elite institutions (like the president or the NYT) struggle to strike a neutral tone, but each side rapidly becomes convinced that they are hugely biased toward the other side, since they are not focusing enough on the outrageous in their personal social media feeds.

Right now this is most obvious in Israel/Palestine and in US politics. But when I covered Tesla a lot two years ago it was the exact same thing. Tesla fans and TSLAQ people constantly at each other's throats and convinced the media (me) was in the tank for the other side.

When I covered the bitcoin block size fight ~6 years ago it was the same thing, with big blockers and small blockers at each other's throats. On every single topic that's even slightly controversial, the Internet widens partisan divisions by creating echo chambers.

In conclusion, next time you're smashing retweet on a video of someone on the other side doing something outrageous, try to remember that at that moment there are people on the other side retweeting videos of the most outrageous things people on your side have done.

@binarybits Connectivity and access to information also brings in more viewpoints and nuance at times. Picking sides and tribalism has been a part of human nature for a long time. What's the evidence the Internet makes it worse?

@binarybits > On every single topic that's even slightly controversial, the Internet widens partisan divisions by creating echo chambers. No the mechanism you described is the exact opposite: its not echo chambers, its continuous exposure to the other side