turns out most businesses predicated on outrage rarely have a long-term profit viability and frequently turn out to be a nothing more than a grift at best. Fac

turns out most businesses predicated on outrage rarely have a long-term profit viability and frequently turn out to be a nothing more than a grift at best. Facebook and Twitter at least, to a degree, managed to monetize trigger emotions like rage, fear and sorrow and spin it into a captive, saleable audience receptive to modern marketing that preys almost exclusively on envy, fear, doubt, and personality matrix of the id and superego. the only issue is this sort of thing is generally entropic; culpable for human misery and uncontrollable chaos. it can be seen as having transformed baby boomers into a generation fueled by white-hot rage for anything that defies the most recalcitrant worldview, despite the internets general attempt to expand and broaden the personal horizon. faecbooks inevitable collapse into an exotic and semiliteral "captured audience" in a virtual world no one asked for, and twitters hardline unregulated pantomime of an Ayn Rand cliffnote that literally spends its dying breath tumbling off a cliff of brand and marketing exodus, can be seen as the natural progression and tendency of what i like to call the rage economy. ironically Parler will likely meet the same fate as twitter, flailing ineffectively with myopic strategic goals to revamp platform aspects or regain trust but with no real directionality outside the latter stages of 'industry that makes people sad or angry for money.' maybe a few name changes (hello Meta) or spicy policy changes ($popular_thing branded as a stage-agent, that aught to show $enemy_group) but the end result is the same.