Abstract:Purpose There is a growing worry about people possibly isolating themselves in online bubbles and avoiding contact with ideas that differ from their beliefs, creating a scenario of ideological polarization. To investigate into this matter, this work aims for a reflection about the contingency of communication in social media. Does social media make the experience of communication in the digital space more contingent (providing it with more possibilities, with people accessing different contents and ideas) or less contingent (reducing the available possibilities, making people isolate themselves)? Design/methodology/approach This is a theoretical work, constructed through bibliographical reviews. To reflect about the question that are posed, the author selected Niklas Luhmann's social systems theory to approach the concept of contingency. In addition to that, the author presented the main arguments of the debates about echo chambers and online bubbles. In the end, the author combined the two reviews together using elements of the Luhmannian theory and drew some conclusions about the initial question. Findings The study concluded that social media have an ambivalent potential regarding contingency in the digital space: it can both expand or reduce the available possibilities of communication, depending on criteria like topic, potential of diffusion and focus of attention. There is no one-side effect. Research limitations/implications The approach at echo chambers does not reflect "the" form of contingency in social media, but "a" form. Therefore, the study cannot provide any general conclusions about the relation between contingency and social media. The digital space is a large one, and more studies are required to achieve more substantial propositions. Originality/value The research has an originality value both for systems theory and social media studies. First, because, as far as the author knows, no other system-theoretical argument has taken the connection between contingency and social media as a primary analysis object. Second, because of a theoretical interpretation effort, the studies of echo chambers indicate mixed results about the phenomenon of online isolation, but no attempt was made to make sense of these mixed results from a specific sociological theory. The author did that by using Luhmann's theoretical framework, which proved to be a good tool for explaining and unifying these different results on a more abstract level.

Social Media: Defining, Developing, and Divining

Social media: A contextual framework to guide research and practice.

Social Media, Quo Vadis? Prospective Development and Implications

NEW MEDIA, MEDIATION, AND COMMUNICATION STUDY1

Researching Social Media as if the Social Mattered

Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media

What is A Discourse Approach to Twitter, Facebook, Youtube and Other Social Media: Connecting with Other Academic Fields?

Toward a normative social media theory for public relations

Social media literacy: A conceptual framework

Social Media Use in Organizations: Exploring the Affordances of Visibility, Editability, Persistence, and Association

The future of social media in marketing

Theories of Social Media: Philosophical Foundations

Twitter, media ecology, information warfare: Ethical and anticipated ethical issues

A marketing communications approach for the digital era: Managerial guidelines for social media integration

Social Media Marketing Management: A Conceptual Framework

Social media, echo chambers and contingency: a system theoretical approach about communication in the digital space

Advances in Social Media Research: Past, Present and Future

The Affordances of Social Media Platforms

A new understanding of ‘New Media’: Online platforms as digital mediums

Impact of Symbolic Interactionism, Pragmatism and Social Constructionism on Communication and Media Practice

Defining affordances in social media research: A literature review