At present, there is certainly a strong echo chamber effect, in which people look to have their opinions validated and get that satisfaction, but at the same time, these blogs couldn't exist without a healthy stream of oppositional writing either.

Two things I'd like to add to the discussion.

First of all... The echo chamber problem isn't a blog specific thing. The mainstream media has just as much of an echo chamber issue, if not more so.

Take the 24/7 TV news channels for instance. If one covers something, the others follow suit. There are remarkably few stories that are only covered on one station. That isn't because that's the only news out there... It's because of the nature of the environment.

Secondly.. From the traditional media/information studies standpoint, the three key roles of the news media are gatekeeping, coorientation, and agenda setting. Drilling into the problem from that angle yields some perspective.

The Internet mostly solves the gatekeeping problem by creating a more open information marketplace. Rather than a small number of gatekeepers due to the high costs associated with maintaining a media outlet of any kind, we have a ton of people that now have the means to provide information to the public. Idealy, the relevant cruft rises to the top. Or at least the outlets that provide interesting perspective rise to the top.

Also in line with that, the agenda setting role is different now due to the Internet. Media consumers have more of a role in deciding what are important issues. The mainstream news media is clearly paying attention to what people are talking about in the blogs. Hence, a feedback loop exists that was previously limited to letters to the editor and whatnot. We have seen a number of stories that have largely been ignored at first, eventually get the attention of the mainstream media because they have been made a big deal of in the blogs. This is obviously a good thing.

However, the agenda setting role is still screwed up by the fact that there are in fact a large number of people who care about Anna Nicole Smith, who don't really care about any important issues.. Given the whole mix is driven by advertising, rather than public interest, those people play a larger role in defining the agenda then people actually interested in important issues. It is way easier to lump stupid people together and feed them shit, than to tackle complex issues.

The real problem is when it comes to the coorentation role. The book excerpt, as well as the discussion here, clearly reflects that the media has been doing a piss poor job of defining the issues. I think this is the area that needs the most attention right now.

RE: Book Excerpt: The Assault on Reason by Al Gore