4 ms·

I think you make a salient point. Historically, news either remained local and did not propagate, or if it did, it propagated slowly, and thus the impact was d

I think you make a salient point. Historically, news either remained local and did not propagate, or if it did, it propagated slowly, and thus the impact was diffused, largely inhibiting reactionary movement. Now, we not only have instantaneous hypersensationalised global media, but the filter-bubble echo chambers of social media which amplify and distort events to fit their world view and agenda, whatever that may be. It's sad, really, as once upon a time we believed the Internet could bring global unity - but rather, it has deepened divisions, pushed political thought to extremes (defensiveness is one hell of a drug), and has brought about much of the societal ill we now see in developed countries. Is there a solution? Facebook seem to be trying to break people out of their bubbles, but the thing is, people like their bubbles, as they're safe and cozy and they don't get angry at what someone they disagree with wrote. Now, I'm pretty sure this same argument was espoused about handbills and movable type, and we demonstrably survived print, but again, velocity is the killer. I'm not sure if it's different or not. Either way, it's the old tribal instincts doing their thing - either we need to collectively adapt (more easily said than done), or we need a technical or legal solution. Legal solutions take the format of restrictions on speech, which nobody wants to promulgate, technical solutions will be worked around. So - it's up to us to try to be better, to try to be moderate, to try not to get pissed off. Maybe the solution is pharmaceutical. Maybe we need Huxley's soma. I don't see how you can change human nature quickly enough otherwise.

Kristine1975 10y ago
Lots of first-world countries have Internet. Not a lot of first-world countries have the amount of shootings, including mass shootings, the US has. That makes me doubt that the Internet is the problem.
- madaxe_again 10y ago
  It's not just shootings, though - the bitter rift that brexit has wrought is part of the same problem. Hell, gamergate sits in the category too. All this drives division, which ultimately drives violence.
  - pjc50 10y ago
    Brexit is just as much, if not more, the responsibility of the newspapers which have spent so long writing misleading articles about the EU and inflammatory articles about "migrants".
    - madaxe_again 10y ago
      Indeed, but that message has likewise been amplified through social media to the point where brexit became possible. Without SM, I don't think it would have happened.
      - ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
        Interesting theory, unfortunately in terms of the Brexit you have the Demographics and their choice of media dissemination, and their vote completely backwards. The older Brits voted for the Brexit in mass, and they're much less likely to get their information from Social Media than the younger generations who voted to stay in mass. Also the British papers and television were largely in the stay camp as well
        madaxe_again 10y ago
        I don't think the effect necessarily requires the agents engaged by it to directly consume social media, as the traditional media producers act as surrogates, and have their increasingly extreme views and publications validated by the echo chamber. It's inarguable that SM has fundamentally altered the news cycle. Additionally, even if only a minority of a group engage in SM, it'll likewise amplify their views which then spill into meatspace, and then propagate through more traditional lines. It turns seeds into saplings, providing fertile ground for the burgeoning crop of political insanity. Add to this reactionary forces, whereby groups step up their rhetoric in defence against a perceived threat to their worldview, and you see that part of what spurred the non SM older brexit group was opposition to theincreasingly shrill and derogatory warnings from the remainers. Essentially, I think social media catalyses division, regardless of whether you directly consume it or not.

Kristine1975 10y ago

Lots of first-world countries have Internet. Not a lot of first-world countries have the amount of shootings, including mass shootings, the US has. That makes me doubt that the Internet is the problem.

madaxe_again 10y ago
It's not just shootings, though - the bitter rift that brexit has wrought is part of the same problem. Hell, gamergate sits in the category too. All this drives division, which ultimately drives violence.
- pjc50 10y ago
  Brexit is just as much, if not more, the responsibility of the newspapers which have spent so long writing misleading articles about the EU and inflammatory articles about "migrants".
  - madaxe_again 10y ago
    Indeed, but that message has likewise been amplified through social media to the point where brexit became possible. Without SM, I don't think it would have happened.
    - ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
      Interesting theory, unfortunately in terms of the Brexit you have the Demographics and their choice of media dissemination, and their vote completely backwards. The older Brits voted for the Brexit in mass, and they're much less likely to get their information from Social Media than the younger generations who voted to stay in mass. Also the British papers and television were largely in the stay camp as well
      - madaxe_again 10y ago
        I don't think the effect necessarily requires the agents engaged by it to directly consume social media, as the traditional media producers act as surrogates, and have their increasingly extreme views and publications validated by the echo chamber. It's inarguable that SM has fundamentally altered the news cycle. Additionally, even if only a minority of a group engage in SM, it'll likewise amplify their views which then spill into meatspace, and then propagate through more traditional lines. It turns seeds into saplings, providing fertile ground for the burgeoning crop of political insanity. Add to this reactionary forces, whereby groups step up their rhetoric in defence against a perceived threat to their worldview, and you see that part of what spurred the non SM older brexit group was opposition to theincreasingly shrill and derogatory warnings from the remainers. Essentially, I think social media catalyses division, regardless of whether you directly consume it or not.