4 ms·

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 m

by 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.

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.