In the debate about filter bubbles caused by algorithmic news recommendation, the conceptualization of the two core concepts in this debate, diversity and algorithms, has received little attention in social scientific research. This paper examines the effect of multiple recommender systems on different diversity dimensions. To this end, it maps different values that diversity can serve, and a respective set of criteria that characterizes a diverse information offer in this particular conception of diversity. We make use of a data set of simulated article recommendations based on actual content of one of the major Dutch broadsheet newspapers and its users (N=21,973 articles, N=500 users). We find that all of the recommendation logics under study proved to lead to a rather diverse set of recommendations that are on par with human editors and that basing recommendations on user histories can substantially increase topic diversity within a recommendation set.

Some fear that personalised communication can lead to information cocoons or filter bubbles. For instance, a personalised news website could give more prominence to conservative or liberal media items, based on the (assumed) political interests of the user. As a result, users may encounter only a limited range of political ideas. We synthesise empirical research on the extent and effects of self-selected personalisation, where people actively choose which content they receive, and pre-selected personalisation, where algorithms personalise content for users without any deliberate user choice. We conclude that at present there is little empirical evidence that warrants any worries about filter bubbles.

The relationship among media, politicians, and the public has been studied a lot, especially how the media’s portrayal of politics affects people’s (cynical) attitudes. Scholars know little about the antecedent of this assumed spiral of cynicism: How cynical are politicians and journalists about each other and about politics? Based on a survey among Dutch politicians and political journalists, the research presented in this article tries to fill this gap. The results show that politicians are rather cynical about media and journalists, especially when they feel media are out to set the political agenda. Journalists are equally cynical about politicians as the latter are about themselves, but it is a relative cynicism since it is lower than that of the general public. Journalists are, however, convinced that most politicians are driven by what we call “media salacity,” a drive to get journalists’ attention and coverage, a conviction shared, surprisingly, by the politicians themselves.

No abstract