Social media is seldom anything but controversial, especially with topics like immigration and social justice dominating discussions. Research from Brigham Young University reminds us, however, that the views we see online don’t represent those of the majority of people, but are instead driven by those on the extremes.

The research found that most people, who occupy more moderate positions, tend to self-censor their online comments so as not to cause arguments or lose friends. No such worries affect those on the margins, however, which helps to create the sense that the world is increasingly polarized.

“Those on the far left and far right are the ones speaking up on social media,” the researchers explain. “They report lower levels of self-censorship than those who are moderate.”

Moderate voices

After quizzing a representative sample of the US population about their social media use, the researchers found that those who self-identify as either strong liberals or conservatives tend also to exhibit the lowest levels of self-censorship online.

By contrast, those adopting more moderate views were much more inclined to self-censor, which creates a kind of silencing effect from this majority.

The authors believe that this self-censorship is largely enacted as people worry about losing friends, but also that there is a fear that expressing certain views will influence how they’re perceived by others.

“For example, if someone wants to post that they think we should be more careful and considerate in how we talk about, treat, and work with immigrants, they might be afraid that they could be identified as a liberal,” the researchers explain.

Ideology trumps positions

Interestingly, the researchers found that self-censorship was far more prevalent when they focused on their political identity rather than any political policy positions, which might help to reduce some of the hostility online.

“Maybe one way to turn down the volume a notch on political social media conversations is to spend less time defending our identities and more time talking about potential solutions to specific social issues,” the authors continue. “If we get out of the mode of trying to prove that we are right and get into the mode of talking about solutions to specific problems, there may be a chance that social media can be a less intimidating place to talk about politics.”

They believe that the findings have some crucial implications, not least of which are a reminder that what we see online might appear to represent the wider public, but that is unlikely to be the case.

“If you feel afraid to post anything, recognize that it might be more related to identity politics than to your sense of connection and belonging,” they conclude. “You can stand up for rational, moderate viewpoints and maintain your friendships. You just have to be willing to leave identity politics behind.”