The Insular Thanksgiving
Algorithms, Media, and the Great Sorting Out of America
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Opening stanza of The Second Coming by William Butler Yeats (1919)
The Insular Thanksgiving
“How could half of the country support that?” This is a question that millions of Americans have been asking themselves for much of the past year. To Harris supporters, it is scary and sad that 50% of their fellow Americans actually voted for Donald Trump. To those same Trump voters, it is inconceivable that anyone could have thought Kamala Harris would have been a better choice to lead this country.
But this is not an article about Trump and Harris, or a lament on our politics; the issues at hand run deeper than that. Both political camps actually share one perspective in common: the feeling that things are not quite right in this country. The partisan divide is not just a question of what shade of red or blue people associate themselves with, but whether the social fabric that binds us together is actually wrenching apart.
How Did We Get Here?
The social dynamic of fellow citizens distrusting, disliking, or disdaining one another is, of course, not actually new. Indeed, as long as human beings have lived, they have existed alongside one another in both cooperation and conflict.
What is also not new are politicians both savagely and subtly taking advantage of our differences to divide us. History is littered with examples. From the French Revolution to Nazi propaganda to McCarthyism to the Apartheid Regime in South Africa, leaders have used fear of the others as a way to consolidate power, exert control, and inflict violence, oftentimes on unspeakable scales. When you refer to your political opponents as enemies or call your fellow citizens the evil within so many times, it doesn’t take long for your supporters to actually believe it and sometimes act on it.
Things may seem worse today for several reasons, though, number one of which is that this is the only era we get to live through and we suffer from a lack of historical perspective. No one reading this lived through the French Revolution, for example. Things may seem as bad as they have ever been today, but that is at least in part due to the fact that we are not able to compare life in 2024 to life in 1789. I actually think life is much better today, thank you very much.
And yet, there are two unique and interrelated aspects of modern American life (and, indeed, global life) that do actually make things different today as compared to those previous eras: the ubiquitous influence of algorithms and the self-selection of media.
A Quick Social Media History
I have a feeling I was probably one of the first 2,000 people on Facebook. Facebook was created in early 2004 by Harvard sophomore Mark Zuckerberg and his friends down the street from where I also happened to be living, at the exact same moment in history, as a Harvard sophomore.
I unfortunately did not know this classmate of mine, Mark, but I am sure we must have eaten in the same dining hall together many times during our freshman year in Annenberg Hall, which is where all the freshman eat together. (I do remember having one meal specifically with the Winklevoss Twins, although not freshman year. As 6’5” identical twins from the rowing team, they cast a memorable wake). I remember when Facebook launched that spring, and after resisting for a few days or maybe a short handful of weeks, I created account just like everyone else and logged in.
Today the term social media is very common, but when Facebook first began, it called itself a social network. The difference is important. At its inception and for at least the first few years, the purpose of Facebook was to connect people. There was always a certain amount of self-aggrandizement at play as people crafted their profiles and developed online personas, and people were hooked on it to the point of obsession right from the start. But I think that was more out of curiosity: what is this new thing? How can I see what my friends, dorm mates, and that girl I like are up to? Countless hours were spent by hundreds of Harvard students on “The Facebook”, as it was known at the beginning, and countless more as the social network spread to other colleges and universities before becoming available to the general public.
What The Facebook was not, at least at the beginning, was this all-consuming thing playing a cornerstone role in people’s lives that it eventually became. Sure, connecting long-lost friends or providing a forum for flirtatious banter (“pokes,” anyone?) was always a core function of the platform, but as Facebook rapidly grew, all of that became secondary features to the bombardment of news, politics, videos, memes, and other various forms of digital content served to us through Facebook that we all know and love today. Over time, Facebook became less of a network, and more of a platform for media.
There is a line in the Netflix documentary about Facebook that says, “If you're not paying for the product, then you are the product.” And Facebook has always been free. To users, it may seem like the product is the content one absorbs while logged in, scrolling the News Feed or looking up a friend’s profile. But the product is actually the users themselves, through a brilliant business plan that got millions of them (now, billions) to input their names, locations, interests and other favorite things including where they go to dine, shop, and vacation. Every interaction on Facebook became a micro-data point of information that was worth digital gold to advertisers, who could use the data to target exactly the consumers they were looking for at precisely the right moments in time based on their preferences, behaviors, and interests.
Cultivating the Product
If users are the product, the purpose of the platform is not how to keep people well-informed or even better connected, but how to keep them engaged. This is true not just of Facebook, but of virtually every tech platform out there. Any company with an online presence depends on your attention. Countless resources have been spent throughout the entire tech ecosystem engineering ways to keep users of an online platform engaged, logged in, and returning to the platform day after day, or even better multiple times a day. This is true of Facebook, for sure, but it is the same for them all: Google, Amazon, eBay, Walmart, Target, and any other online retailer you can name - they just want to keep you logged in and scrolling….with them.
What Facebook engineers figured out (and probably knew all along) was that there are certain types of content that keep people engaged. Yes, this includes content meant to get people riled up. Emotions sell, which is, of course, just Marketing 101. There has been a healthy dose of that on all social media platforms from the beginning.
But there is a less nefarious type of content, too, that Facebook serves up: the content people self-select on their own. Are you a parent who is constantly “liking” your adult child’s updates with photos of your grandkids? The algorithm knows to feed you that content at the top of your News Feed every single time you log in. Are you a teenager quietly checking out a would-be partner’s profile to see what he or she is up to? The algorithm knows you want more, and you’re going to see that person’s updates more and more often. Do you live in a town with its own Facebook page that posts local updates and maybe even videos of town meetings? If you engage with those posts by liking, commenting, or sharing them, you’re going to see a lot more of them.
And guess what? A lot of that is good! For people with hundreds if not thousands of “friends” on Facebook and dozens more business and non-profit pages they follow, you cannot possibly see everything - there is just not enough room in the News Feed. So why not have all of that content algorithmically curated to show you what you actually want to see. That makes sense! And it’s a good business model!
The Problem of Selective Exposure
There is a problem here, however, at least as it pertains to the civic (and I would say, mental) health of the country. Over the course of time, a person’s dozens and then hundreds and then thousands of interactions on Facebook (or Instagram, or X, or TikTok, etc.) leads to a curious reality for users: the world narrows. The horizon shrinks. What once felt like a boundless field of ideas has become an overly cultivated walled garden, where the flowers are unsurprising and looking fairly similar to all the other flowers.
What self-selection of content (fueled by the algorithms) has done is leave people surrounded by people and ideas that reinforce what they already believe rather than challenging them to think different or exposing them to new ideas. Don’t like what a friend said about Trump? Mute him. Don’t like someone’s views on transgender rights? Unfriend her.
Even when an actual unfollow or de-friending of someone doesn’t sever the connection, slowly disengaging from posts by people who disagree with you politically by not “liking” or “commenting” upon them will lead that algorithm to deliver you less and less content from someone with that different political persuasion. This happens all the time, and is part of a reshuffling of friendships and relationships towards unanimity and mutually reinforcement.
The opposite happens too. I saw myself on Election Night 2024 and in the days that followed how many of my Trump-supporting friends were giving each other the equivalent of digital high-five’s by commenting, liking, and sharing each other’s posts celebrating victory. On the other side, I saw my Harris friends consoling one another, liking and loving each other’s laments about our country’s future, and essentially hunkering down together. All of that activity gives juice to the algorithm, and all of those Facebook users are only going to see more content from those like-minded friends in the days and weeks ahead.
In advocating for free speech in an open democracy, philosopher John Stuart Mill argued that even the most controversial opinions should be aired because they either hold some truth or challenge prevailing beliefs, preventing society from growing complacent. However, in today’s hyper-curated social media environment, we are not only shielded from dissenting views, but also continuously fed content that affirms our own beliefs. This selective exposure distorts our perception of reality, making caricatures out of those who think differently if not severing people with different views out of our lives altogether.
From Disagreement to Division
There was a time when political or ideological disagreements were not dealbreakers in personal relationships. People could sit at the same Thanksgiving table, argue, laugh, and leave with their bonds intact. Today, many are unfollowing, blocking, or outright avoiding those who hold opposing views - not because they merely disagree but because they perceive those differences as existential threats. “We agree to disagree” has shifted to “I can’t associate with someone who thinks like that” and, in some cases, to “That person wants to destroy everything I value.”
This is the danger of our algorithmically curated lives: they reinforce a version of the world where the "other side" is always wrong, often evil, and possibly irredeemable. When this becomes our default lens, we lose the capacity to engage in meaningful conversations, let alone trust that others might also want what’s best for the country, even if their path differs. It becomes like we are living in completely different worlds from one another, because in many ways, we are. This is dangerous for the country, as it becomes difficult if not impossible to solve complex challenges when half of the country believes the other half is incompetent, dangerous, or worse. And why wouldn’t they, when the algorithm are feeding them continuously reinforcing content affirming this?
The particularly worrisome thing for the future our of country is that this is not just happening in the digital space, but IRL, as the kids would say (online slang for “in real life”). Increasingly, we are only spending time with those with like-minded views. Churches are increasingly either “conservative” or “progressive.” Community organizations are filled either with the MAGA-types or the lefty-liberals. And as I wrote about a few weeks ago, people are even geographically moving into communities (and states) with like-minded politics, part of a Great Sorting Out of Americans, which only further entrenches the Red State - Blue State divide.
Even worse, some people are just checking out of civic life altogether. It’s very hard to get people to run for local office today, for example, which I think is due at least in part to fears of blowback from neighbors and fellow community members about mismatched politics.
And lastly (for now), a topic worth its own space entirely, we are also self-selecting non-social media sources that reinforce what we already believe rather than challenging ourselves to think different. Conservatives watch Fox News, progressives watch Rachel Maddow, and there is no Walter Cronkite to tell Americans how it is, nor would Americans as a whole sit down together at 6:30 pm to watch that person if he or she did exist. Just as we are choosing our own influences on social media, our self-selected consumption habits of TV, radio, podcasts, YouTube, and other news platforms also, more commonly than not, serves to reinforce our existing views rather than challenge us to grow and think differently, a phenomenon psychologist refer to as either Uses and Gratification Theory or confirmation bias.
Bridging the Divide
Thanksgiving, as a time when families and friends with diverse perspectives gather, offers a perfect metaphor (and perhaps a practical starting point) for rebuilding our connections. It is surely easier said than done, especially for those with complicated, difficult, or toxic family dynamics. Yet in the spirit of hopeful optimism, here are three actionable ways to start:
Be Friends with People Who Are Different
Diversity of thought is as crucial as diversity of background. Seek relationships with those who challenge your beliefs. This doesn't mean you need to agree on everything, but exposing yourself to different viewpoints can broaden your understanding and remind you of our shared humanity.Assume Positive Intent
In most cases, people act out of what they believe is right, not malice. When someone expresses an opinion you strongly disagree with, try asking questions instead of reacting defensively. Curiosity can disarm conflict and foster empathy.Focus on Shared Values
At the heart of most debates are common goals: safety, freedom, opportunity, and community. Highlighting these shared aspirations can make disagreements feel less like battlegrounds and more like collaborative problem-solving.
I have quoted Daniel Patrick Moynihan several times in The Sunday Morning Post, who is the author of one of my favorite quotes: “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.” Yet the deluge of misinformation and selective narratives in today’s media landscape means facts themselves are contested. The antidote is not just to seek truth but to approach it with humility. We must recognize that none of us has the complete picture and that our neighbors, even those who disagree with us, are not our enemies.
As we gather this Thanksgiving, let us resist the temptation to retreat into our ideological bunkers or to see the world only through the narrow lens of curated feeds, which have largely become curated based on our own biases, preferences, and behaviors. Instead, let’s engage one another—truly and openly. If the social fabric is fraying, it is up to each of us to mend it, one conversation, one relationship, and one act of understanding at a time. Thanksgiving is more than a meal. It’s a reminder of what connects us: gratitude, togetherness, and the enduring hope that we can still find common ground.
Ben Sprague lives and works in Bangor, Maine as a Senior V.P./Commercial Lending Officer for Damariscotta-based First National Bank. He previously worked as an investment advisor and graduated from Harvard University in 2006. Ben can be reached at ben.sprague@thefirst.com or bsprague1@gmail.com.
Thanksgivings of the Sunday Morning Past
I have been writing The Sunday Morning Post since 2021. The weekly articles have included an annual mini-series of Thanksgiving articles. You can read them in the back catalogue below:
November 21, 2021: The Tired Thanksgiving/People Are Worn Out
November 20, 2022: The Expensive Thanksgiving/Plus: Are Food Drives Helpful?
November 19, 2023: The Vibes-Are-Off Thanksgiving
I’ll try to find a more positive spin next year. Looking back I’ve had a pretty dismal tone each Thanksgiving. It’s a good holiday!
Weekly Round-Up
Here are a few things that caught my eye this week that I think might interest you too:
Thanksgiving Dinner is going to cost less this year! Thanks, Biden or Trump Already Getting Results, depending on your algorithm-induced persuasions. Read more here.
The Greatest Investor in the World, Warren Buffett, is building up his cash. Cash holdings for Berkshire Hathaway are over $325 Billion. At nearly 30% of the company’s assets, this is the largest amount of cash Buffett has ever held. Is he expecting a stock market drop? It certainly seems so. Read more here.
Virgin Media 02 has created an AI bot that will respond to phone scammers in the voice of an old lady, whose job is to keep the scammer on the line as long as possible to waste their time, and then provide incorrect bank info to lead them even further off track. What a great use of AI! Read more here.
Via Jay Parsons, multifamily residential construction starts in October were running at the lowest rate in the last 12 years. This does not bode well for future apartment supply. See more here.
The poem in the article preamble today is “The Second Coming,” by William Butler Yeats. I had to memorize it for a class my senior year in high school, and it has always stuck with me (Thanks, Mr. Ames!). Here is the full text:
Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity. Surely some revelation is at hand; Surely the Second Coming is at hand. The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert A shape with lion body and the head of a man, A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun, Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds. The darkness drops again; but now I know That twenty centuries of stony sleep Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle, And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
On that happy note, Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours! Best wishes for a peaceful and relaxing week. We will see you next Sunday.
The best, the most civilized and generous thing I have read all week. And very much to the point. Thanks for setting an example.