The Twitter Echo Chamber and Idea Labs
Twitter's mission is to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly without barriers. The oversimplification on Twitter leads to wanted or unwanted to Echo Chambers.
Summary
Growing personally, as a group, and as a community requires us to exchange ideas, challenge them, refute bad ideas, promote good ideas, and challenge and replace previously good ideas with changing circumstances.
One core concept that presides on Twitter is the Echo Chamber. Echo chambers are self-confirming groups that promote their ideas, shield themselves with ignorance, and are insusceptible to change. These Echo Chambers have had horrible effects on people’s investment decisions, promote fake information, and bring out the primitive side of its participants. People within Echo Chambers align their identity with the core ideas and beliefs of the group. So, arguing against them is like insulting them.
Contrary to Echo Chambers, there are Idea Labs or, in Ray Dalio’s words, an idea meritocracy. In these Idea Labs, identities and ideas or knowledge are separated from each other. Attacking another person’s idea within this system is strongly promoted and doesn’t affect the person behind the idea.
To make the best use of Twitter as a source of information and idea exchange, we’ll look into the following topics:
What’s an Echochamber?
Culture’s impact on us.
An Example of an Echo Chamber on Twitter
How does Twitter work?
Friend or Foe - The Slim Path on Twitter
The Solution - Idea Labs
If you like my work, feel free to share it with others!
Introduction
I’ve been active on Twitter for around 1-2 years, and I’ve been observing cult-like behavior and Echo Chambers in various forms and characteristics. Many smart individuals that are thoughtful, observant, and empathic when they’re on their own fall victim to Twitter’s communal conviction philosophy. I did so myself, publishing Tweets conforming to some of FinTwit’s cultural norms to enter the FinTwit communities and get retweeted by larger accounts that approve of the stocks and statements that I tweeted.
The line between conviction and blind belief is slim, and I’ve seen many smart people fall victim to it.
What’s an Echo Chamber?
To understand the concept of an Echo Chamber, we must dive into the human mind. Many great psychologists wrote about herd-like thinking and cults. Gustave Le Bon, with his in 1895 published book “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind,” is probably one of the most famous contributors.
Le Bon argued, now accepted as the norm, that people gathering in groups or crowds with a similar cultural identity develop a crowd emotion and other unique traits that none of the individuals possess. Le Bon labels the new emotions and traits as “crowdsoul;” the crowd is subject to the law of the mental unity of crowds (loi de l’unité mentale des foules.)
Le Bon argues that the crowd is not the average or sum of the individuals within the group but forms a completely new intelligence and emotional characteristics. For example, during the french revolution, even the mildest, nicest, and most intelligent individuals became part of an aggressive mob that did horrible things. When someone asked the individual after the event why they did what they did, they could utter no reason - the crowd has sub-conscious control over the individuals.
Conclusion: A crowd is its own entity, driven by its own set of emotions and desires, and is not the sum or average of the individuals creating it. The intelligence of the crowd entity (this case) is less than that of the people within, and its thoughts are primitive.
Culture’s impact on us
Each of us is part of one or more cultures with different rules, norms, and value systems. Each of us is managing these cultures or groups of diverse people daily. We’re different when we’re with family than at work, and so on. Some of these cultures create the foster-bed for crowds, and Echo Chambers others develop favorable idea labs. I say that an Echo Chamber is a predecessor of a crowd, as Gustave Le Bon’s definition.
Within these cultures exist (dis-) incentive systems that move one forward or backward in the ranks. It provides individuals with praise, inclusion if they adhere or ridicule and shame if they don’t adhere to the cultural norms.
In FinTwit terms, conforming to the cultural norms and rules means that larger accounts will retweet and like one’s tweets. In the best case, they will even promote them when they feel that the new Tweeter conforms well within their ranks.
But, we’re moving ahead of ourselves.
Many scientists think of the human mind as a dichotomous (split in two) system with a slow intellectual thinking and a primitive fast thinking system (sources: Thinking Fast and Slow, The Primitive and The Civilized mind, The Crowd, Waitbutwhy - Echo Chambers)
There is general agreement that the transition between those systems is not binary but works along a spectrum. Within a culture (in this case, a bad one - Echo Chamber), the established rules, norms, and value system is the primitive mind that steers the thinking.
Not all cultures are Echo Chambers, but all Echo Chambers have their specific culture. Cultures can be positive and intellectually reinforcing. Waitbutwhy calls this kind of culture Idea Labs.
Within an Echo Chamber, the established norms and rules are like the primitive system that everyone within has to adhere. Waitbutwhy made a fantastic illustration of a group of friends that are Packers fans. The baby in the middle is the cultural convention that everyone within the group must like the packers.
If someone within the group doesn’t like the Packers (he is more than eligible to like and dislike whatever he wants,) the group doesn’t just take it as an opinion from the person but as an insult against their cultural norms and identity. That’s because the primitive mind of the Echo Chambers makes a causal connection between the idea and their identity.
In FinTwit terms, that means that if Account A (within his Echo Chamber) says that stock X is a great investment. Account B says that stock X is a bad investment (with appropriate reasoning). Account A takes Account B’s statement as a personal insult because, within his mind, he associates the stock idea too much with his identity.
Making an idea, investment, team, or culture, one’s identity associates any disagreement with the idea with a disagreement of the fundamental beliefs and identity of the person and group. It goes even further because of the primitive mind of the Echo Chamber. The association continues to a point where conclusions about the other person’s identity and beliefs are made. For example, if critique A goes to Bitcoin Maximalists and tells them that Bitcoin has no long-term potential (with some informational background), the Maximalists first associate the disagreement with an insult to their identity. They then continue inferring that the person is probably ignorant. Finally, conclude that the person is a bad investor or worse, a bad human.
We’ve had many, and I mean many, examples of this sort of Echo Chamber or even cult-like thinking. Dictatorships form around them, or revolutions emerge from this we-vs-them thinking. Sports fans and hooligans exhibit this strongest form of thinking.
An Example of an Echo Chamber on Twitter
If we take FinTwit as an example, we look at the Peloton stock from the end of 2020 to early 2021. Saying that the Peloton stock is a bad investment at ~$40bn means that you disagree with an Echo Chamber that is all on board the Peloton ship. Disagreeing implies that you’re not one of the people on that ship and that you’re missing out. They then associate your missing out with being a bad investor that’s not worth paying attention to or, even worse, worth shaming and excluding from the community. Here is a collage of the Tweets from that timeframe.
The FinTwit Echo Chamber ensures that positive tweets about the stock are reinforced, retweeted, and liked.
The same is true for many Bitcoin Maxi groups. Disagreement with the group and their core belief of Bitcoin being the future means that you do not just disagree with the idea but with who they are.
One year ago, when Bitcoin was around $50k-$60k, I stated that a larger correction could very well be on its way, based on historical occurrences. The response I received was one of ridicule.
At this point, it’s worth mentioning that I’m portraying this picture solely on an Echo Chamber group level, not an individual level or intellectual (Idea Lab) group level in which disagreement among each other is promoted.
Echo Chambers are groups of agreement and confirmation. It’s easy to become part of such a group. You need to adhere to the group’s belief system, and rising in ranks comes with promoting the group’s belief openly outward.
Waitbutwhy made a fantastic illustration of the internal processes of an idea lab and Echo Chamber. An Idea Lab works along two dimensions where disagreement and decency are decoupled from each other because disagreeing doesn’t mean that a person disagrees with the person’s identity, just with his idea.
You can disagree with me, be nice about it, and we can be best friends. But you can also be an asshole and agree with me, and we’re no friends. Especially in engineering, ideas and identities are often disconnected from each other. Engineering departments are often idea labs where ideas and knowledge are shared, challenged, ridiculed, fought for, defended, disproved, and much more. At the end of the day, the engineers still go for a beer because, in an idea lab, ideas and identities are disconnected from each other.
In an Echo Chamber, decency and agreement are merged on one axis. If you disagree with me, you’re automatically an asshole in my eyes.
How Does Twitter Work?
When I first decided to contribute actively on Twitter, I read a short pamphlet called “The Art of Twitter” by LifeMathMoney. It’s a nice little booklet that guides you through searching for a niche to write about, setting up your account handle, name, picture, bio, header image, and strategies to grow your account. The pamphlet provides a few examples of Twitter engagement strategies that do and do not work.
To generate a following, contributors must engage with other members before focusing on writing their own tweets. That means commenting on others’ tweets and adding thoughtful and crisp comments to a discussion. The goal is to generate likes and eventual retweets from your comments.
Generally, the content in the pamphlet is available in many forms on other websites for free. Here are the aspects that I find most interesting and helped me grow my following a bit.
Between 0-5000 followers, tweet 15-20 times a day. Three normal tweets, most of your tweets are informative replies to tweets from large accounts. Make sure that you’re adding to the discussion.
Between 5000-10000 followers, reply around 5-6 times a day, instead of 10-15. Tweet normally between 3-10 times a day. Add some automation to your Twitter process. Twitter shows your tweets only to around 20% of your followers. Automate the retweets of your own Tweets to increase the reach of your tweets.
Beyond 10000 followers, no need to reply anymore and tweet 5-10 normal Tweets a day.
To summarize much of what’s in the pamphlet, to grow on Twitter, you need consistency, relevance, and catchiness.
Friend or Foe - The Slim Path
Replying to larger accounts is crucial to growing your audience, which is where the challenge comes up. Especially on FinTwit, you don’t want to make an enemy out of the larger account by disagreeing with it or pulling the wrath of its followers on you. You add to the discussion with additional, mostly positive, information. That increases the chance of getting a positive response from that account and probably a retweet.
When you have no followers, you start commenting on accounts with 500-5000 followers. When at 1000 followers, you comment to accounts with 5000-20000 followers. You get the idea.
Once you start getting the affirmation of the large account and its followers, you move in a similar direction, posting content that they’d agree on, and you can share with them. Very few larger accounts appreciate active discussions and disagreement.
The result is the FinTwit Echo Chamber.
This concept of growing your accounts naturally leads to echo chambers rather than idea labs. Most accounts write about the same stuff, discuss similar topics, and share comparable news and ideas.
The Solution - Idea Labs
There are very few proponents of discussing and challenging ideas on Twitter. I follow a few of them, and most of these accounts’ primary purpose is not earning money through Twitter (directly or indirectly) but legitimately sharing valuable information to an online audience.
Two examples are Lyn Alden Schwartzer and Trinh Nguyen.
Lyn is a fantastic macroeconomist. She started on SeekingAlpha and grew organically on multiple platforms because of data-driven information about markets. Her work has no focus on a particular stock or sector and doesn’t promote things that Lyn hasn’t thoroughly researched. More importantly, she invites counterarguments from any level and discusses them (if viable). Disagreeing with her doesn’t affect her as a person, but her thesis, which she thankfully invites.
Trinh Nguyen is another fantastic macroeconomist and writer. She is data-driven and shares insightful information with her followers about the global macro-landscape. She has a particular focus on Asian markets. Like Lyn, Trinh invites discussions below her tweets and counterarguments based on data.
Look for Accounts and communities that act like Idea Labs:
To grow as an individual and community, act and think like an engineer. Detach your identity from your ideas. Find accounts with this engineering mindset and honestly curious about people challenging their idea. Accounts that say, “I don’t have an answer to this. I need to research this topic further. Do you have any sources for me to inform myself?”
Idea labs show general respect at the individual level. People encourage each other to share ideas and counterarguments. The account fosters intellectual challenges and admits to being wrong.
On a community level, people maintain their individuality and enjoy factual discussions. Check the comment section of the larger accounts for active dialogue in which ideas are challenged and not shifted towards personal insults.
Distance yourself from Repetitive Shouting
Echo chamber accounts repeat their messages frequently. They simplify investment research and don’t invite counterarguments or quickly mark them as irrelevant to their grand thesis. They exploit a simple human cognitive bias - the illusory truth effect. People tend to believe false information to be correct after repeated exposure.
It’s strengthened by another cognitive bias, the recency bias, where humans give recent events greater importance than historical ones.
These accounts often sell similarly structured pamphlets on Gumroad, and their goal is to make money through these echo chambers.
Direct Message
Directly messaging accounts and asking them for more information about the investment thesis is a great way to build connections and learn more about the account.
Accounts that welcome constructive criticism will often interact and allow feedback and information that could challenge their investment thesis.
Conclusion
Substantial simplification, repetition, confirmation, and shouting are the core characteristics of echo chambers. Echo chambers have many negative consequences for the individuals participating in them.
Echo chambers encourage ignorance. Many human cognitive biases are encouraged through echo chambers. Recency bias, illusory truth, illusory correlation, belief bias, hindsight bias, framing, and worse of all, confirmation bias.
Echo chambers make individuals more primitive. Especially on Twitter, the simplifications used and shouted out repetitively prompt people’s primitive cognition. Le Bon described this primitive being meticulously.
An echo chamber undeservedly promotes self-assurance. Constantly hearing confirming messages and dismissing any opposing idea by the intrinsic filter mechanisms of the Echo Chamber fosters a culture of ignorance and self-assurance. An echo chamber is great at filtering out information that could harm the core concept of the group. On Twitter, this concept is often labeled as “conviction.” While a conviction for investment is good to an extent, it should not turn into blind belief and ignorance against any viable information from outside.
If you like my work, feel free to share it with your peers. I always welcome criticism and feedback. In that case, just send me a message on Twitter or Substack.