When Amy’s twin girls were born almost three months prematurely, her husband Vern got online right away to find out everything he could about “preemies.” But his search quickly became overwhelming: for every opinion in one direction, there seemed to be someone else giving the opposite advice. The sheer volume of messages made available by converging media can lead to information overload, the difficulty in sorting through and making sense of vast amounts of information. Pavlik and McIntosh (2013) argue that, apart from the difficulty for individuals, information overload can also hinder the ability of government agencies to act on shared information and make it difficult for employees to share information effectively within their companies. Media multitasking can exacerbate the problem, as studies show that multitasking hinders our ability to attend to and focus on the information we most need (Ralph, Thomson, Cheyne, & Smilek, 2013).

It can also be difficult to evaluate the quality of information in converging media. Some information online is edited by professional journalists, some is user contributed and edited (such as Wikipedia), and some is unedited information posted on forums, blogs, or personal Web sites. Rumors, hoaxes, and conspiracy theories abound (catalogued and investigated at Snopes.com). The potential for effective citizen participation is limited when users create or distribute false or other dangerous kinds of information online.

Participation is also ineffective when users fail to think critically about the information they find on the Internet. Much like with the traditional media, a site that looks credible, with professional design and impressive depth of content, may be given higher credence even if it might otherwise be suspect given its origins or sponsorship (Flanagin & Metzger, 2007). To make good on the promises of digital media for social and political participation, we need to devote our attention to the quality of our own and others’ mediated communication.