Regular access to constantly renewed online content favors radicalization of opinions

Worry over polarization has grown alongside the digital information consumption revolution. Where most scientific work considered user-generated and user-disseminated (i.e.,~Web 2.0) content as the culprit, the potential of purely increased access to information (or Web 1.0) has been largely overlooked. Here, we suggest that the shift to Web 1.0 alone could include a powerful mechanism of belief extremization. We study an empirically calibrated persuasive argument model with confirmation bias. We compare an offline setting -- in which a limited number of arguments is broadcast by traditional media -- with an online setting -- in which the agent can choose to watch contents within a very wide set of possibilities. In both cases, we assume that positive and negative arguments are balanced. The simulations show that the online setting leads to significantly more extreme opinions and amplifies initial prejudice.