• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Efficacy of Outrage

NWRatCon

NWRatCon

Eco**Social Marketeer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2019
Messages
34,181
Reaction score
34,449
Location
PNW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
In an excellent thread topic, or friend @SNOWFLAKE sought to generate discussion about why the Loft is such a ghost town. This thread, in a way, is an answer to that thread.

In our modern environment, it's all about "influence". Influence is measured by "clicks" (what used to be referred to as "eyeballs" in the advertising world). Clicks are generated by interest, so actual content is irrelevant, response is what is significant. Facebook, in particular, has demonstrated this, but it is endemic to all social media and internet outlets, especially as interpreted by algorithms and their more advanced cousins, AI.

So what is most likely to generate clicks? According to those algorithms: emotional content. And the strongest emotion is outrage. Yes, tittilation is still up there, but nothing beats a good "mad". George Orwell captured this in the concept of the "Two minutes hate" in 1984.

Politicians, of course, have known this, well, forever, and newspapers have counted on this for as long, but the advent of online publishing has kicked that combination into overdrive. As our attention span shrinks, we are bombarded by ever more outrageous content to attract it. The disaster cycle has been stuck on "fever pitch" for some time.

This cycle explains many aberrant effects in our society: the dulling of emotions, increasing acts of violence, even the election of Donald Trump. To misappropriate Stalin, "outrage has a quality of its own."
 
Most our fellow travelers on here won't read this. They just want to rant and rave against the "other side."
 
NWRatCon said:
Politicians, of course, have known this, well, forever, and newspapers have counted on this for as long, but the advent of online publishing has kicked that combination into overdrive. As our attention span shrinks, we are bombarded by ever more outrageous content to attract it. The disaster cycle has been stuck on "fever pitch" for some time.
Click to expand...
Voters have ALWAYS decided on emotion, not rationality.............always
 
BirdinHand said:
Yep.

“if it bleeds, it leads” was an old saying.

Along with “sex sells”
Click to expand...
America's culture of violence. Academically we're failing as a nation, but in violence we're strong. Compared with other Western countries, North America is extraordinarily violent. So, of course its gonna make its way into social media and news outlets. I wonder how many people were murdered in Chicago over the weekend.
 
I thought this discussion might be an antidote to what is going on all around downstairs. There are a dozen or so rage-bait threads on Charlie Kirk alone, and, as SNOWFLAKE points out, many of the usual characters are busy posing in them and disrupting others.

I think it is possible to have good discussions without vitriol, even about difficult topics. It's hard to generate outrage in the Loft, so that alone might limit participation...
 
NWRatCon said:
I thought this discussion might be an antidote to what is going on all around downstairs. There are a dozen or so rage-bait threads on Charlie Kirk alone, and, as SNOWFLAKE points out, many of the usual characters are busy posing in them and disrupting others.

I think it is possible to have good discussions without vitriol, even about difficult topics. It's hard to generate outrage in the Loft, so that alone might limit participation...
Click to expand...
No. As I have found out already, people want to spit nails. Particularly those of a particular political persuasion. My attempts on The Loft have gone plop.

Not sure if I will ever do another on here. It's futile. As for the dozens of Charlie Kirk threads, today's theme seems to be how violent the left is, at least to posters have done back to back threads yelling and screaming about how violent liberals are. In fact they sound so angry I wonder if they themselves would love violence done to us.
 
In the Loft, the best we can accomplish is to dribble nails...
 
Meanwhile, have any of you checked out social media?

Half the ads coming across my feed on FB are somehow related to Kirk.

This is a gigantic boom for clicks and interactions 😔
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
No. As I have found out already, people want to spit nails. Particularly those of a particular political persuasion. My attempts on The Loft have gone plop.

Not sure if I will ever do another on here. It's futile. As for the dozens of Charlie Kirk threads, today's theme seems to be how violent the left is, at least to posters have done back to back threads yelling and screaming about how violent liberals are. In fact they sound so angry I wonder if they themselves would love violence done to us.
Click to expand...
@SNOWFLAKE, since I may need you to sponsor me if I'm forced to flee to Canada, I will go to the Loft and play nice. What shall we discuss?
 
I love to discuss topics, even argue points (my profession), but neither of those requires drowning out the opposition (even if you want to actually drown them). But, the prevailing style is shouting. Substance is not a requirement.

So, wanna get sticky?

I've frequently noted that Trump is not an exception to the Republican playbook, but its natural denouement. There is a direct line from Ronald Reagan's "Welfare Queen" claims to Donald Trump's "carnage". The through line is coded racism. And nothing outrages racists like identifying them. Get them mad enough, and they won't think about anything else.

Some claim this is "art," and Trump a genius at it, but that's not accurate. It's a technique, true, and it is a practice. But, in reality, it's a crude tool. When all you have is a hammer, smash everything with it.

But all of us are susceptible when the right trigger is found. That's why everyone is grouped and inflammatory labels are so effective. It takes considered thought to separate the wheat from chaff. If we're reacting, we're not considering. That's the trap.
 
NWRatCon said:
In an excellent thread topic, or friend @SNOWFLAKE sought to generate discussion about why the Loft is such a ghost town. This thread, in a way, is an answer to that thread.

In our modern environment, it's all about "influence". Influence is measured by "clicks" (what used to be referred to as "eyeballs" in the advertising world). Clicks are generated by interest, so actual content is irrelevant, response is what is significant. Facebook, in particular, has demonstrated this, but it is endemic to all social media and internet outlets, especially as interpreted by algorithms and their more advanced cousins, AI.

So what is most likely to generate clicks? According to those algorithms: emotional content. And the strongest emotion is outrage. Yes, tittilation is still up there, but nothing beats a good "mad". George Orwell captured this in the concept of the "Two minutes hate" in 1984.

Politicians, of course, have known this, well, forever, and newspapers have counted on this for as long, but the advent of online publishing has kicked that combination into overdrive. As our attention span shrinks, we are bombarded by ever more outrageous content to attract it. The disaster cycle has been stuck on "fever pitch" for some time.

This cycle explains many aberrant effects in our society: the dulling of emotions, increasing acts of violence, even the election of Donald Trump. To misappropriate Stalin, "outrage has a quality of its own."
Click to expand...
Great thread and a lot to think about. Thank you.
 
BirdinHand said:
Meanwhile, have any of you checked out social media?

Half the ads coming across my feed on FB are somehow related to Kirk.

This is a gigantic boom for clicks and interactions 😔
Click to expand...
I get SO MUCH irrelevant junk I wonder just how unsophisticated those algorithms must be. But the, to be humble, it is important to remember, "But all of us are susceptible when the right trigger is found." That includes me. I suspect a lot of those irrelevant posts are the algorithm trolling for responses.
 
BirdinHand said:
Do most people actually want to bother going any further than “the trap” though?
Click to expand...
I think some of them do want to dwell in the trap, but they are the spiders to the fly types. They're there to keep the hapless victims tied up in irrelevant responses. I suppose that a "troll" is the equivalent of the spider.

I.
"Will you walk into my parlour?" said a spider to a fly;
"'Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy.
The way into my parlour is up a winding stair,
And I have many pretty things to shew when you are there."
"Oh no, no!" said the little fly, "to ask me is in vain,
For who goes up your winding stair can ne'er come down again."

II.
"I'm sure you must be weary, with soaring up so high,
Will you rest upon my little bed?" said the spider to the fly.
"There are pretty curtains drawn around, the sheets are fine and thin;
And if you like to rest awhile, I'll snugly tuck you in."
"Oh no, no!" said the little fly, "for I've often heard it said,
They never, never wake again, who sleep upon your bed!"

III.
Said the cunning spider to the fly, "Dear friend, what shall I do,
To prove the warm affection I've always felt for you?
I have, within my pantry, good store of all that's nice;
I'm sure you're very welcome – will you please to take a slice?"
"Oh no, no!" said the little fly, "kind sir, that cannot be,
I've heard what's in your pantry, and I do not wish to see."

IV.
"Sweet creature!" said the spider, "you're witty and you're wise.
How handsome are your gauzy wings, how brilliant are your eyes!
I have a little looking-glass upon my parlour shelf,
If you'll step in one moment, dear, you shall behold yourself."
"I thank you, gentle sir," she said, "for what you're pleased to say,
And bidding you good morning now, I'll call another day."

V.
The spider turned him round about, and went into his den,
For well he knew, the silly fly would soon come back again:
So he wove a subtle web, in a little corner, sly,
And set his table ready, to dine upon the fly.
Then he went out to his door again, and merrily did sing,
"Come hither, hither, pretty fly, with the pearl and silver wing;
Your robes are green and purple – there's a crest upon your head;
Your eyes are like the diamond bright, but mine are dull as lead."

VI.
Alas, alas! how very soon this silly little fly,
Hearing his wily, flattering words, came slowly flitting by;
With buzzing wings she hung aloft, then near and nearer drew,
Thinking only of her brilliant eyes, and green and purple hue;–
Thinking only of her crested head – poor foolish thing! – At last
Up jumped the cunning spider, and fiercely held her fast.

VII.
He dragged her up his winding stair, into his dismal den,
Within his little parlour – but she ne'er came out again!
– And now, dear little children, who may this story read,
To idle, silly, flattering words, I pray you ne'er give heed:
Unto an evil counsellor, close heart, and ear, and eye,
And take a lesson from this tale, of the Spider and the Fly.
Click to expand...
— Mary Howitt (1828)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom