It can be helpful to think of the information that we are exposed to in the same way as we think about the food we consume: a diet. Like a diet, the information consumed is not the same for everyone, and it is not the same for a given individual across time. There are trends and fads that come along that can affect many. And the diet can be balanced and healthy…or not. During the stay at home orders brought on by the coronavirus pandemic, many Americans have had more time on their hands, and the result is more time spent online. But rather than that diet being more of the same,  there seem to be some important differences that could end up having a long term effect on public attitudes.

In the recent New York Times article, “The Virus Changed the Way We Internet,” the writers report on data collected from internet service providers and analyzed in a number of interesting graphs. “Stuck at home during the coronavirus pandemic, with movie theaters closed and no restaurants to dine in,” the writers note, “Americans have been spending more of their lives online.” They note the obvious, that there has been more Netflix as well as more online video games. And they also note a few additional trends.

More Social Media Use

Even as we are following “social distancing,” we are also looking for social connections. We are mostly home-bound, but also engaging more frequently than usual with our network of friends and family in order to compensate. Based on the internet providers’ data, use of Facebook, for example, is up 27 percent in the past couple of weeks.

What Does This Mean for Jurors? It is a reminder that we don’t just passively receive information. We seek things out based on what we need at the moment. In isolation, we seek out connection. So the implication is to treat jurors and other humans as “information wolves,” not sheep. In other words, we hunt, we don’t passively graze.

Much More Video Conferencing

The widespread practice of work-from-home has also led to increased reliance on video services. “With the rise of social distancing,” the reporters write, “we are seeking out new ways to connect, mostly through video chat.” Meetings that might have been a phone call a few weeks ago are now conducted on Zoom, Webex, or Microsoft Teams.   

What Does This Mean for Jurors?  I believe that, as a large part of the population suddenly becomes much more familiar with video-conferencing over the web, then some other activities — online focus groups and mock trials, remote testimony, maybe even actual trials conducted remotely —  may become more likely, even after the pandemic dies down.

A Return to Mainstream Media

Consistent with the earlier point that people are purposeful in their information consumption, there seems to be a renewed emphasis on getting reliable information. The reporters note, “The search for updates on the virus has pushed up readership for local and established newspapers, but not partisan sites.” So ideological sources like Daily Kos and Breitbart are flat, but sites like CNBC, Washington Post, and New York Times are dramatically up. Even Fox News’ numbers don’t compare well to other large outlets. The trend in looking for sources with less of an obvious axe to grind has included local newspapers, particularly as those sources have loosened their paywalls in order to promote public information. People are looking for expertise, and it is interesting to note that while Wikipedia use is flat, use of the website of the Centers for Disease Control is substantially up.

What Does This Mean for Jurors? As people look for information that is informed and reliable, it is possible that it could contribute to reduced polarization within our society and, by extension, the jury pool. If the habit lasts (which, I realize, is a big “if”), then it could contribute to a gradual lessening of divisions, not just based on the political parties, but also based on attitudes about science, media, education, personal responsibility, and a variety of other issues.

____________________

Image credit: 123rf.com, used under license, edited by the author