YouTube’s SkeptoSphere and Its Fringes: A Marketplace of Ideas or the Shoppes of Sophism?

The marketplace of ideas is contended by many to be the practice of an open exchange of ideas with the best ideas winning out. Essentially, the marketplace of ideas is founded on the philosophical ideas presented by John Milton in his 1644 text, Areopagtica, and in John Stuart Mill’s 1859 text, On Liberty. The notion of the marketplace of ideas is that “truth will prevail” in an open exchange of ideas. Ingber (1984) sates, “The imagery of the marketplace of ideas is rooted in laissez-faire economics” (Ingber, p. 5). This concept has been extended to include the freedom of speech and expression. Ingber says:

“A diversity of perspectives first requires a corresponding diversity of social experiences and opportunities. Consequently, in spite of the rhetoric surrounding it, freedom of speech by itself cannot ensure a diverse and interactive marketplace of ideas” (p. 86).

On the Internet, almost anything is accessible. Individuals have the opportunity to locate and use information in nearly limitless ways. For instance, there are numerous YouTubers regurgitating various talking points and ideas on cultural and political topics presented by more prominent YouTubers on their channels. This does seem to be true in the “skeptic community” and its fringes. Their motivations are their own for doing this (I don't presume that they have a unifying or shared goal), but it’s probably for visibility, views, subscribers, and … money? Is there any money to be made in this kind of activity anymore? It doesn’t seem like it after the two “Adpocalypses.” Does this kind of activity spread awareness of corruption, put things into better perspective, educate, or reveal any truth? Are these kinds of videos disposable? Should they be considered otherwise? Is it all only about personality and perspective? Political activism? Perhaps they are all just entertainers? Their combined effort does seem to be one of free speech and truth (the cause ... at this current point in time being stressed...).

YouTube is an interesting way to share ideas. There is still a lot of regurgitation going on, though, which sometimes seems to only create substitute narratives supported by shaky or shady evidence, logic, and reasoning, encouraged by leading personalities on YouTube. For the time being, I am willing to call this activity “substitute-narrative communities.” Substitute-narrative communities are communities that explore and react to alternative arguments, the finer points, as well as present conspiratorial leads and weigh in on how mainstream media is presenting their narrative. They are peripheral to the larger discussion, though.

Now, I am not looking to measure the usefulness of this kind of activity here. I have no way to do any such thing. But I do think it is worth considering at this point, since the underlying premise is one of a marketplace of ideas. On this notion, Ingber continues:

“If we intend to design a social and political system open to the development of diverse perspectives and values, we must first understand how an idea initially outside the community agenda of alternatives becomes accepted within it” (p. 86).

Gordon (1997) has criticized the use of “the metaphor of the market,” stating that it “is inappropriate and inconsistent with Mill's text “as well as the "further consequences of accepting the metaphor to describe Mill's view of free expression” (Gordon, pp. 246-47). Perhaps YouTube’s SkeptoSphere and its fringes is the best example of the marketplace of ideas in some ways. Now, this is not a direct response to Gordon’s criticism of this idea. Is YouTube’s SkeptoSphere and its fringes a bastion of free speech (or is it simply held important by individual creators that promote the idea of free speech)? Will the truth generally prevail in a marketplace of ideas? How accurate is the phrase “the marketplace of ideas” in a modern context? The Internet? YouTube? In terms of YouTube’s SkeptoSphere and its fringes, is making videos, commenting on them, and responding to them reflective of a marketplace of ideas? How?

Here is perhaps a more entertaining thought. Could this kind of activity accurately be called sophism and if so, is it necessary in developing and creating ideas in this kind of medium? Or is it just random jackies on the Internet pushing bully bull? Perhaps I am casting too wide of a net in this sense...

Some of the inconsistencies in the sub-narratives that I am still working through (specific examples):

Premise - Higher education in the U.S. (sometimes in the west in general) is a source of leftist indoctrination. Yet many continue to use academic sources, statistics, and studies generated by academics or individuals trained in academic institutions as evidence to support their premise(s) or refute claims on various topics. Even if the sources are non-academic, the government and organizations still use individuals that are academically trained to conduct research.

Premise – Postmodernism is bad or a no-no and should be eradicated or be avoided. Yet many of the videos that they create are aesthetically (artistically) and technically postmodernist (using visuals, creating a visual pastiche or parody of sorts, depending on the kind of argument strategy being employed) as well as the way in which they formulate their arguments, such as borrowing from multiple disciplines (cross-disciplinary) or communities, and including popular cultural references or works in their analysis or presentation of their argument (in a sense continuing with the notion of a pastiche or parody). So, interacting in a postmodernist environment (such as on YouTube) and employing various strategies that are usually associated with postmodernism is permissible? Memeing is a postmodern activity. 

Sources

Gordon, Jill. (1997). "John Stuart Mill and the 'The Marketplace of Ideas.'" Social Theory and Practice, 23(1). pp. 235-249.

Ingber, Stanley. (1984). "The Marketplace of Ideas: A Legitimizing Myth." Duke Law Journal, 1, pp.1-91.

Mill, John Stuart. (1859, 2013). On Liberty: A Translation Into Modern English. Translated. Industrial Systems Research. Manchester, England. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cVWlg2ex_AkC&pg=PR1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false

Milton, John (1644). Areopagitica, A Speech of Mr. John Milton for the Liberty of Unlicenc'd Printing to the Parliament of England (1 ed.). London. Google Books https://books.google.bg/books?id=nejQAAAAMAAJ&dq=areopagitica&pg=PP13#v=onepage&q=areopagitica&f=false