By Guilianna Laurain
Anyone who has ever gotten into an online argument in the comments section of a Reddit post has likely wondered whether social media is making everything worse. That very issue was the focus of a recent event hosted by the Institute for Ethics in Public Life, titled “Did Social Media Break America?”
The conversation was inspired by an article published in The Atlantic almost three years ago by social psychologist Jonathan Haidt. In “Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid,” Haidt argues that social media has essentially torn American society apart. He compares our current state of political polarization and social fragmentation to the biblical story of the Tower of Babel, where people who once spoke the same language suddenly couldn’t understand each other.
Dr. Daniel Lake, one of the event’s speakers, broke it down for students. Social media is the biggest culprit behind America’s current state of division. Platforms like Facebook, X, and Instagram have changed the way we communicate, and not in a good way.
Lake explained that when Facebook first launched, it was just a simple network to connect people. No likes, no shares and no algorithms pushing the most outrageous content to the top of your feed. Over time, social media companies introduced features that rewarded engagement. People engage most with content that triggers strong emotions.
“We’re in a moment where we have a deep level of fragmentation in our society,” Lake said. “And the causal factor is social media.”
The discussion highlighted how social media encourages extremism by amplifying the loudest, most radical voices. Those who hold moderate views often get drowned out, while the most divisive content gets rewarded with attention. Instead of uniting people, platforms have created an “us vs. them” mentality, dividing audiences by political beliefs, demographics, and other characteristics.
Lake also tackles the subject of anonymity. There’s a reason people feel the need to be cruel or provocative online–it’s easier to say something extreme when you don’t have to face real-world consequences.
One of the ideas that stood out in Lakes’ argument was that many people feel like they can’t speak freely anymore. Lake mentioned that people are often afraid to express views that don’t perfectly align with those of their in-group, whether that’s on the left or the right. Fear of backlash, whether professional, social, or personal, keeps people from engaging in real conversations.
People who do speak up often get recruited into extreme ideologies–not because they start out radical–but because they’re constantly fed content that reinforces one perspective. Over time, this leads to an echo chamber effect, where people are only exposed to their own beliefs, making it even harder for people to see eye-to-eye.
Lake touched on potential solutions, such as media literacy education. He argued that students need to be trained in critical thinking, research and how to analyze sources. Learning to fact-check and consider multiple perspectives could help prevent people from falling into the algorithm’s trap.
