Mediatization, polarization, and intolerance (between environments, media, and circulation)

Individuals, collectives, and polarization in the unstable situation caused by mediatization and... 247 tweets generated by opponents. Those who live in government neighborhoods receive a dispro- portionate number of government-related tweets. Each user lives in a politically segregated neigh- borhood or at least much more segregated than in their non-virtual lives (ibid., p. 27). It happens on social networks, according to his anal- ysis, that are dominated by institutional actors and powerful enunciators (the most retweeted 6 ). And from this analysis, Calvo points out that The fundamental question that a study on polar- ization must answer is not the reason why there are fakes, opportunists, and operators willing to manipulate public opinion. The issue is why a large mass of voters accept and take as their own what the opinion-makers say, regardless of wheth- er the narrative was created out of conviction or to obtain political gain. The answer is simple: on Twitter, the vast majority of those around me agree with what I think (ibid., p. 29) 7 . In this way, the question of the reason why society is polarized finds, in the perspective of the echo chamber, a new version, updated to the digital media, automation, personaliza- tion, and algorithms. It is a new version, we could say, of the pow- er of the media . According to this perspective, communities are 6 Thus, he points out: “In the virtual space, institutional actors dominate. Political parties, journalists, civil servants, government agencies, governors, mayors; all try to construct narratives that maximize their own political goals. Only a few bloggers and professional operators (trolls, bots, fakes) alter the institutional logic of information transmission. Although social networks democratize the access and dissemination of information, the voices that are recognized by the public are not many. What Aníbal Fernández says (at that time Chief of Cabinet of the government - clarified by the author) is incomparably more visible than what Adriana, Pablito, or Lucas Fernández says. It is because, behind Aníbal Fernández, there is a political party with thousands of militants, government in- stitutions, and a set of political, social, and economic relationships that Adriana, Pablito, or Lucas do not have at their disposal. Power asymmetries in Argentine politics are rebuilt on social networks” (CALVO, 2015, p. 22-23). 7 “The goal of Twitter is to improve the browsing experience for those who use its service. However, the result is an information distribution mechanism that is spatially segregated by communities and reinforces original identities” (CALVO, 2015, p. 26).