4 ms·

@dang [2016] I wonder what the author would think of the fresh cycle of euphemism derived from platform algorithms, like "unalive." You cant unalive an idea

by adolph 2y ago

@dang [2016] I wonder what the author would think of the fresh cycle of euphemism derived from platform algorithms, like "unalive." You cant unalive an idea . . . . . . but you can euphemize it Many social media websites do not allow discussions about violence, or self-harm. Some have automated bots scanning for words like, "murder", "suicide", "gun", etc. Because it can be very difficult to avoid mentioning those topics in conversations about things like history, social media influencers started using alternate words and phrases, like "unalive" for murder or suicide, and "pew pews" for guns (imitating the sound children tend to make when they're pretending to shoot guns). [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/18vdpyg/whats_going_on_with_using_the_term_unalive/ https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/18vdpyg/whats...

aftbit 2y ago
I've seen this on YouTube, especially around the Ukrainian conflict. Many creators are saying things like "became KIA" instead of "were killed" or even more euphemistically "loud noises were heard at XYZ location" instead of "XYZ was bombed". Perhaps related in the sense of being self censorship of restricted topics, although not liguistic, is the recent trend of firearm-related YouTube channels showing disassembly but not assembly. Of course assembly is mostly just disassembly in reverse, but one is permitted by platform terms and the other is not.
wavemode 2y ago
Yep, internet censorship drives the creation of a whole lot of modern euphemistic slang like unalive, grape, pdf file... You take them as just being workarounds for having discussions online - but then you start hearing people say them in real life and realize they've actually entered the general lexicon.
Cthulhu_ 2y ago
And I don't get it. If the intent is "we do not want people to talk about death", then surely the filters / censors would cover all different spellings and euphemisms of it as well? I'm 99% sure the organizations that do this - tiktok, roblox, etc - are well aware of the users' attempts of euphemizing around the filters, so they are OK with it. That, or it's from higher up but the legal whatsits can't keep up.
- StevenWaterman 2y ago
  It's the advertisers that don't like discussion of death near their adverts. So services can say "we don't monetise content that mentions death" and then their algorithm downranks that content because it's unprofitable
  - ryandrake 2y ago
    But the people using euphemisms are also talking about death. Don't the advertisers object to that, too?
    - adolph 2y ago
      The advertiser's objections must be implemented with actual words since the semantic layer is not yet computable. Maybe an llm could associate "die" to "unalive" and treat them the same way for the purpose of advertiser demonetization; time will tell and as censorship tightens the circumlocutions will broaden.
    - StevenWaterman 2y ago
      Yes, but nobody really cares that much, either at the social media platform or the advertiser. They just want plausible deniability
bitwize 2y ago
The irony is that "unalive" has its origins in the currently-trending character Deadpool. There was an episode of the 2012 animated series Ultimate Spider-Man in which Spider-Man teams up with Deadpool to take down a criminal. Deadpool then casually discusses his plans to "unalive" the criminal at which point Spider-Man says "Unalive... you mean kill him?!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXknwMx0_BQ&t=3m38s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXknwMx0_BQ&t=3m38s Deadpool's fourth-wall awareness (which manifests in-universe as mental illness) enabled him to know that he was in an animated cartoon series, but he was applying the standards of animated series from the 1980s and early 1990s, in which death was not discussed and the topic was avoided entirely. Sometimes the baddies spoke of "destroying" or "eliminating" their opponents, but never killing them. Ultimate Spider-Man was a more mature series released in a time when we thought we'd moved beyond such standards-and-practices nitpicking in the name of "protecting the children" but... apparently we have not. New media (YouTube) provoked new moral panics and the cycle repeats...

by adolph 2y ago

aftbit 2y ago

I've seen this on YouTube, especially around the Ukrainian conflict. Many creators are saying things like "became KIA" instead of "were killed" or even more euphemistically "loud noises were heard at XYZ location" instead of "XYZ was bombed". Perhaps related in the sense of being self censorship of restricted topics, although not liguistic, is the recent trend of firearm-related YouTube channels showing disassembly but not assembly. Of course assembly is mostly just disassembly in reverse, but one is permitted by platform terms and the other is not.

wavemode 2y ago

Yep, internet censorship drives the creation of a whole lot of modern euphemistic slang like unalive, grape, pdf file... You take them as just being workarounds for having discussions online - but then you start hearing people say them in real life and realize they've actually entered the general lexicon.

Cthulhu_ 2y ago

And I don't get it. If the intent is "we do not want people to talk about death", then surely the filters / censors would cover all different spellings and euphemisms of it as well? I'm 99% sure the organizations that do this - tiktok, roblox, etc - are well aware of the users' attempts of euphemizing around the filters, so they are OK with it. That, or it's from higher up but the legal whatsits can't keep up.

StevenWaterman 2y ago
It's the advertisers that don't like discussion of death near their adverts. So services can say "we don't monetise content that mentions death" and then their algorithm downranks that content because it's unprofitable
- ryandrake 2y ago
  But the people using euphemisms are also talking about death. Don't the advertisers object to that, too?
  - adolph 2y ago
    The advertiser's objections must be implemented with actual words since the semantic layer is not yet computable. Maybe an llm could associate "die" to "unalive" and treat them the same way for the purpose of advertiser demonetization; time will tell and as censorship tightens the circumlocutions will broaden.
  - StevenWaterman 2y ago
    Yes, but nobody really cares that much, either at the social media platform or the advertiser. They just want plausible deniability

bitwize 2y ago

The irony is that "unalive" has its origins in the currently-trending character Deadpool. There was an episode of the 2012 animated series Ultimate Spider-Man in which Spider-Man teams up with Deadpool to take down a criminal. Deadpool then casually discusses his plans to "unalive" the criminal at which point Spider-Man says "Unalive... you mean kill him?!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXknwMx0_BQ&t=3m38s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXknwMx0_BQ&t=3m38s Deadpool's fourth-wall awareness (which manifests in-universe as mental illness) enabled him to know that he was in an animated cartoon series, but he was applying the standards of animated series from the 1980s and early 1990s, in which death was not discussed and the topic was avoided entirely. Sometimes the baddies spoke of "destroying" or "eliminating" their opponents, but never killing them. Ultimate Spider-Man was a more mature series released in a time when we thought we'd moved beyond such standards-and-practices nitpicking in the name of "protecting the children" but... apparently we have not. New media (YouTube) provoked new moral panics and the cycle repeats...