4 ms·

"Vanishing" implies that there was some Golden Age of civility that has now gone by. This is not really true. I would argue that this impression comes from the

by tribune 10y ago

"Vanishing" implies that there was some Golden Age of civility that has now gone by. This is not really true. I would argue that this impression comes from the fact that media options were much more limited in the recent past, and therefore had to appeal to and not offend a wider range of audiences than current sources. Watching TV programs from the 50s/60s, for example, they do seem quite polite and civil. Now though, options abound. Why should I watch a whitewashed and generic news program when I can listen to vitriolic talk radio or scroll through my website of choice and see exactly what I want to see? Not to mention that every "jerk/bozo/asshole" can pour his heart out online. The downfall of the previously-more-mainstream Mainstream Media has simply enabled more impolite and "uncivil" voices to stand out from the crowd (for better or worse). As far as personal and professional interaction, the responsibility for maintaining civility in such environments falls on the individuals taking part. Don't tolerate bullshit from employees. Be respectful to your friends/family, and expect the same in return.

digi_owl 10y ago
In other words, curation. For every readers letter that reached the opinion pages, 100s or perhaps even 1000s ended up in the bin at the hands of the editor. What seems to have happened is a mentality change. Rather than seeing ads as a funding source for journalism, journalism (or a watered down variant) has become the means of pushing ads in peoples faces.
freshhawk 10y ago
Yes! This is the inevitable outcome of the world of connectedness and giving a voice to the voiceless that we all wanted isn't it? It comes off as overly cynical, but this seems to me to merely be the removal of a veil of ignorance about what people actually think and how they actually want to behave when they are either anonymous or not present physically (with the possibility of having their mirror neurons engaged, physical assault, in person shaming, etc). If it wasn't obvious beforehand, then it must be obvious in retrospect that a culture war was the inevitable result right? While I agree that the responsibility falls on the individuals taking part ... pragmatically isn't the outrage economy going to work for a long time? And the physiological tools for encouraging uncivil behaviour just going to keep getting better for a long time? I have my doubts that any significant percentage of people will be able to follow that path of individual responsibility when so many smart people are constantly trying to nudge them off of it using subtle methods the targets don't even understand. Calls of "can't we all just get along", whether directed against physical violence or uncivil discourse, however correct, never seem to do much when the problem is occurring in a system that benefits from the opposite.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
jcoffland 10y ago
I don't know. Usually I recoil from nostalgic rememberings of the way things used to be but I believe that people tended to be more respectful to one another in the past, even if they were assholes.
prawn 10y ago
More than enabled, media has encouraged the more outrageous voices. Shockjocks get a lot of attention and make a lot of money. The media doesn't have an interest in civility, it has an interest in maintaining divisive and largely 'solved' issues.
- Asooka 10y ago
  e.g. all the articles on how Pokemon GO will get you stabbed, killed, run over in traffic, mugged, thrown off a cliff and make you stumble over piles of dead bodies in crack dens.

by tribune 10y ago

digi_owl 10y ago

In other words, curation. For every readers letter that reached the opinion pages, 100s or perhaps even 1000s ended up in the bin at the hands of the editor. What seems to have happened is a mentality change. Rather than seeing ads as a funding source for journalism, journalism (or a watered down variant) has become the means of pushing ads in peoples faces.

freshhawk 10y ago

Yes! This is the inevitable outcome of the world of connectedness and giving a voice to the voiceless that we all wanted isn't it? It comes off as overly cynical, but this seems to me to merely be the removal of a veil of ignorance about what people actually think and how they actually want to behave when they are either anonymous or not present physically (with the possibility of having their mirror neurons engaged, physical assault, in person shaming, etc). If it wasn't obvious beforehand, then it must be obvious in retrospect that a culture war was the inevitable result right? While I agree that the responsibility falls on the individuals taking part ... pragmatically isn't the outrage economy going to work for a long time? And the physiological tools for encouraging uncivil behaviour just going to keep getting better for a long time? I have my doubts that any significant percentage of people will be able to follow that path of individual responsibility when so many smart people are constantly trying to nudge them off of it using subtle methods the targets don't even understand. Calls of "can't we all just get along", whether directed against physical violence or uncivil discourse, however correct, never seem to do much when the problem is occurring in a system that benefits from the opposite.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

jcoffland 10y ago

I don't know. Usually I recoil from nostalgic rememberings of the way things used to be but I believe that people tended to be more respectful to one another in the past, even if they were assholes.

prawn 10y ago

More than enabled, media has encouraged the more outrageous voices. Shockjocks get a lot of attention and make a lot of money. The media doesn't have an interest in civility, it has an interest in maintaining divisive and largely 'solved' issues.

Asooka 10y ago
e.g. all the articles on how Pokemon GO will get you stabbed, killed, run over in traffic, mugged, thrown off a cliff and make you stumble over piles of dead bodies in crack dens.