Why do we put forward the concept of "Information Honeycomb"?

Humans are metaphorical animals.

In our cognitive activities and daily practices, all kinds of metaphors, big and small, are always abundant. They are deeply internalized and hidden in our thinking structures, forming our basic understanding of the world and governing our attitudes and behaviors.

In the cognitive aspect of algorithm technology, the "information cocoon" is undoubtedly an important metaphor.

This metaphor was first proposed by Cass Sunstein and constructed over the following decades. The construction process was complexly driven by multiple forces such as politics, capital, and changes in social mentality. Instead, the technological factor became the least noticeable part. The beauty of this concept lies in the use of the metaphor of the "cocoon". It is concise enough and vividly visualizes the potential impact of algorithms. Thus, in the subconscious of us viewers, the operation of algorithms is no longer blank and indescribable. Instead, like a cocoon, it binds users layer by layer.

This forms a firm perception of algorithms for many people. They believe that algorithms greatly narrow people's access to information, trapping them in the interest cages woven by personalized recommendations.

But is this really the case?

Not to mention that in the academic circles at home and abroad, apart from the imaginative criticism of the information cocoon, there is not a single convincing empirical study to prove the real existence of the cocoon effect of algorithms. Nor to mention that there are so many media product choices nowadays. Even if a certain product really builds a cocoon using algorithms, users still have a lot of choices, such as choosing information sources without algorithm intervention or choosing information streams based on timelines and followers. When we briefly go back to the pre - algorithm era, we will find that in the era of information scarcity, the limited information sources and the limited content consumed by each person made the cocoon effect even more obvious. Scarcity means closure.

The fate of a social science theory depends on its communicability, not its correctness.

The information cocoon has become popular because it is vivid and, to some extent, caters to the collective subconscious of the current criticism of algorithms.

But what has such a critical and negative concept brought to society even if it really exists? Can it make technology a little better? In a reality where algorithms have almost become the established destiny and way of existence for humans, such a purely critical and non - constructive concept cannot bring any increment.

The concept of the information cocoon was proposed by Sunstein in 2006. At that time, the Internet was still in the blog era, algorithms were not yet mature and popularized, people's information consumption was still shrouded in the afterglow of traditional media, and their spiritual lives were not as closely connected with the Internet as they are today. Applying this concept to the criticism of algorithms today actually, to some extent, strips it of its social, historical, technological, and political contexts related to the two - party politics in the United States.

Similar to the limitations faced by many concepts, the information cocoon cannot fully and accurately summarize everything that is happening today. At the same time, as a concept with negative connotations, the "information cocoon" can only partially point out the problems brought by algorithms, but it is hard to say that it can constructively lead the development of algorithms and AI towards goodness.

As Kevin Kelly said, when we try to change something bad, the best way is to create something better to replace it. This is actually the starting point for us to propose the concept of the "information beehive". We try to go beyond the information cocoon and explore the possibility of building a better information ecosystem.

The information beehive describes a diversified, transparent, and collaborative information ecosystem. It is also a more constructive concept, emphasizing user participation and algorithm cooperation. Building the information beehive is not only crucial for breaking the information cocoon. We also believe that the information beehive should become an ecological appearance pursued by all social media platforms, content information platforms, and even the entire Internet world.

Like the cocoon, the information beehive is also a metaphor. The beehive represents the ecosystem, and the bees represent users. The structure of the beehive is open and diversified. Users can shuttle among numerous "beehives" (information sources), just like bees flying among hundreds of flowers, absorbing nutrients and actively seeking knowledge without imprisoning themselves or being restricted in a cocoon. At the same time, bees are the builders of the beehive. Through active collection, creation, and collaborative processing, they gradually build a good ecosystem.

The core differences between the information beehive and the information cocoon are:

First, the information beehive aims to increase information symmetry, while the information cocoon aims to increase information asymmetry.

Second, the information beehive reduces the push of similar information on the one hand and increases the distribution of heterogeneous information on the other hand. In contrast, the information cocoon weaves users' "interest cells" through the repeated push of similar information.

Third, the purpose of the information beehive is to narrow the distance between information recipients and the objective real - world environment. The information cocoon creates a "pseudo - environment" completely different from the real picture for information recipients, distorting the appearance of the real world and restricting users in their own world of ideas.

Fourth, the information beehive emphasizes the interaction and cooperation among users. Social interaction based on diversified connections is the key support for building the information beehive.

The information cocoon and the information beehive are two completely different information ecosystems. To promote the transformation from the cocoon to the beehive, on the one hand, platform algorithms need to play a cooperative role, using means such as dispersing intervention and content deduplication to prevent information homogenization, and continuously expanding users' interest scope through active push. On the other hand, key actors (such as professional media and opinion leaders) need to play a leading role and actively contribute good content and high - quality choices. Moreover, every user's effort is needed. Users should exert their subjectivity, improve their media literacy, and actively break existing cognitive biases. Through their information consumption and creation behaviors, they can promote the formation of a better information ecosystem.

The information beehive encourages users to become the builders and organisms of the information ecosystem. Just as each bee is the main body participating in building the beehive, each user is also a participant and builder of a good information ecosystem.

Humans are the products of the environment and also the creators of the environment. Bees and silkworm pupae are two completely different insects. One actively creates, explores, constructs, and collaborates in groups, while the other is a passive "couch potato", self - enclosed from the inside out. These two completely different states determine the differences in their environments - the beehive for bees and the cocoon for silkworm pupae.

Kevin Kelly proposed the "swarm effect" in his book Out of Control. This is a decision - making method of distributed management. What each bee does is very simple, but in the end, complex decisions are made. The swarm effect describes how collective intelligence beyond individual capabilities is formed through the autonomous decision - making and collaborative actions of dispersed individuals. This is also the vision pursued by the information beehive. Building a good information ecosystem requires the power and awareness of 1.1 billion Internet users.

Personally, we might as well ask ourselves. As information consumers in the new era, can we fight against human biases a little bit through our own efforts and cognitive improvement? Can we conduct multi - source verification and distinguish the truth when encountering a sensational piece of news? Can we actively access information from different positions and cultures without relying on a single platform or information source? Can we not blindly believe the information we obtain and learn to question, verify, and compare?

Be a little bee in the information beehive, not a silkworm cocooning itself in the information cocoon.

All information technologies are always challenged when they emerge. Looking back at the history of media technology development, from spoken language to writing, and then to radio, television, and computers in the era of electronic media, almost every new technology has triggered people's panic and doubts. In Phaedrus, Socrates condemned writing for harming human memory and called for a return to the era of spoken language. After the emergence of radio and television, critics attacked electronic media for harming the rigorous and rational thinking mode formed in the printing era. When the computer came out, it was portrayed as a terrifying monster. The most representative voice was Nicholas Carr's criticism in The Shallows that the Internet leads to the degradation of human thinking.

Similarly, when algorithm technology becomes increasingly mature and involved in content distribution, people start to worry that their thinking ability will be restricted, their independent minds will be dominated, and the public's thoughts will be violated, and even the progress of human civilization will be affected. In a sense, this is in line with the past criticism of new technologies, which stems from the uncertainty of new things and the resulting fear. Anyway, the "information cocoon" is a Huxley - style warning, reminding us to avoid the alienation of humans by technology. The information cocoon and the information beehive start from the negative and positive perspectives respectively but can eventually converge on a common understanding of how to build a better information ecosystem.

The "cocoon" in the "information cocoon" is, after all, the "cocoon" of self - enclosure. In the end, information consumption is in the hands of individuals. So, is it information that traps people in the cocoon, or is it human nature that shapes the information cocoon? It's hard to say. The complexity of the information cocoon stems from its close relationship with human nature: Humans are naturally inclined to approach familiar people and things, prefer views consistent with their own cognition, and instinctively reject anti - cognitive views. This comes from the oldest driving force of human nature. We blame technology because it never talks back. But the problem is that blaming technology cannot solve the problem. Exaggerating the negative effects of new technologies will only hinder technological progress.

We must admit that algorithms have changed our real and conceptual worlds. Now we can access far more abundant information than in the pre - algorithm era. If you want to buy something, you can search for hundreds of shopping references at any time. If you have the time and energy, you can open any information - based APP and refresh it intensively 24/7, and fresh information will pour in at any time.

At the same time, because of the existence of algorithms, it is difficult to form a "consensus" at the mass level. In the current media environment, it is difficult to have a super - idol like Jay Chou or Jacky Cheung that everyone knows well, and it is even difficult to have a popular song like "Little Apple" or "Gangnam Style" a few years ago. Whether from the individual, group, or global perspective, "self - indulgence in one's own circle" is becoming the norm. The information cocoon is actually just a small metaphor for the "cocooning" of human society.

The problem described by the "information cocoon" actually reflects the immaturity of algorithms. A mature algorithm can provide people with various types of useful information, improve production and living efficiency, and promote people's broad vision and ideological progress. This is the manifestation of technology moving towards goodness, and it is also the core starting point for us to propose the "information beehive". Of course, the information beehive is also a visionary description. Whether it is scientific needs to be demonstrated and experimented by the academic community, and how to achieve it requires continuous exploration by the industry to form an effective and universal path. We hope that the information beehive will be a conceptual framework for multi - party participation and collaborative construction.

In the foreseeable future, algorithms will play an increasingly important role in our lives. Building the "information beehive" is not only related to our current reality but also to the distant future of humanity.

Even Sunstein, who proposed the concept of the "information cocoon", pointed out in Infotopia that "new communication technologies are making things better, not worse". With the progress of technology and the deepening of human cognition, we have reason to believe that the problem of algorithm bias will be properly solved.

This article is from the WeChat official account "Tencent Research Institute" (ID: cyberlawrc). The author is Wang Huanchao, and it is published by 36Kr with authorization.