3 ms·
The fundamental issue, I see, is the polarizing platform. When it comes to modern day discourse you're not looking at a nuanced debate, you're just seeing pro a
by ljm 9y ago
The fundamental issue, I see, is the polarizing platform. When it comes to modern day discourse you're not looking at a nuanced debate, you're just seeing pro and anti. I don't even need to cite a source, you just need to look at the division in the world around you and wonder why it looks so fucking simple. Nobody is focusing on big issues because everybody is being told to look for an attack or to make a defense.
It's an old book but I recommend reading Flat Earth News by Nick Davies, it gives an incredible insight into how current affairs are spun into particular forms to suit certain agendas. The key motif of the book is that there are more than two sides to every debate but we treat it as gospel that you're either for or against. It's never so easy as that.
- dfsegoat 9y agoYour first paragraph is so spot on IMO, that it frightens me. We, as free thinking, reasonable people are continuously drawn into hyper-polarized debates, particularly on social media: There is no nuance (as you said), only pro vs anti (as you said II). It also seems fairly systematic, and that we are clearly being kept busy with these "debates" while we are flanked and maneuvered on.
- telchar 9y agoThe huge growth of fake news/misinformation and punditry-as-news in the last couple years, which really has been on the rise for decades, seems analogous to trolling. It's very difficult to have a good discussion with nuance and mutual respect when trolls are involved in a thread. Likewise it seems the general public conversation is being disrupted and dumbed down. I see the same effect you do and I think on at least some parts it's intentional.