What if blogs only tell us what we want to hear?

There is considerable literature one can access that bears on the question of how and if we might benefit from web 2.0 tools (excuse this phrase if it annoys you – this is not about 1.0 vs. 2.0).On one side, there is Cult of the Amateur arguing that shared free knowledge is likely to be flawed. On the other side, you have Wikinomics; Small Pieces, Loosely Joined; Smart Mobs; parts of The World is Flat; etc. arguing that online information sharing is better than sliced bread, fresh bagels, or chocolate. I bounce between being depressed and elated depending on which book I happen to be reading.While I do not really feel I am closer to the answers I am looking for, I keep buying these books.My most recent trip to Barnes and Noble led to the purchase of Infotopia. The author examines the question of how (and if, I guess) many minds produce knowledge. Many minds in this case do not necessarily have to express their wisdom via a computer and the Internet, but blogs, wikis, online prediction markets, etc. figure prominately in the author’s agenda. The book draws on what seems a literature from social psychology or management investigating “deliberating” groups and the question of whether a group will be able to surface and integrate collective knowledge.Many times it appears that deliberation – open sharing and discussion – does more harm than good. I did pick up a couple of useful phrases. At least, if I don’t have answers it may now appear like I understand the problems. Cocoon and echo chamber – we tend to read those who think like us and we tend to repeat similar messages in follow-up interactions. I used to call this the “CNN vs. Fox effect”, but now I have some new terms. As applied to blogs, the blogs we select to inform us may tell us what we want to hear rather than challenging us to consider different perspectices. The result is a radicalization of beliefs and values and possibly the perception that we have become educated. It is true, I have not read a pro NCLB blog lately.I have been following a different kind of approach that on the surface may offer a remedy. The Economist has been sponsoring debates for the benefit of readers for some time (at least as I understand the background). The publication is now attempting to adapt this tradition to the Internet with some twists (viewer voting). The readers were even allowed to vote on questions and the questions selected for “debate” involve technology and education. After reading Infotopia, this makes some sense. No matter what positions readers bring to process, they will encounter reasoned argument on both sides of an issue. This is worth following (note – registration is free).