Still reading this, but I wanted to go ahead and offer my objection to a polemic that uses Twitter posts as a jumping-off point. Twitter's use of addictive dar

Still reading this, but I wanted to go ahead and offer my objection to a polemic that uses Twitter posts as a jumping-off point. Twitter's use of addictive dark patterns is well-known, and those techniques bring out the worst and and most mindless in people. E.g., compare Greenwald's consistent, well-researched op-ed's to his bitter, nasty ad hominem attacks in his varous Twitter insult-wars. It's as if everyone has decided to get coked up and go talk politics at 2 a.m. at a noisy club. I'm sure it's convenient for journalists to start there since they know everyone is at the club, but it's also lazy if they start every article with shit cokeheads were yelling at each other. (As well as boring for readers.) A significant portion of our population, including journalists, is addicted to social media. As a society we have yet to take steps to curb this toxicity. Now, can we please at least admit this is a problem and quit letting this sludge leak into serious writing for the sole benefit that it's free and easily discoverable? Edit: from Strangio: "it was supposed to be a cheeky response to Bari [Weiss] not something to be taken on its own terms without that context." What's more generous-- that Strangio is secretly against free-speech and intrepid Greenwald caught him before he deleted his true feelings, or that a system that optimizes for dogfights got the better of Strangio?