Social media is creating and enabling hate, fear and violence (1 Viewer)

[Evo1883]

I said this the other day and I think it's a reasonable assumption to be honest, I'm sure social media at the time was created with all the right intentions, however it's gone way beyond its intended purposes, but what can be done?

I want to throw an example at you, now whether you are right, left, middle ground I just want you to read through this thread of replies to this tweet, and try an absorb the hate and anger from all sides... It's cancer and imo will end up banned or regulated heavily

 

---

[fernandopartridge]

Trump is hateful character, so is that response.

 

[Evo1883]

Trump is hateful character, so is that response.

This response is no different to many on there tbh..
See I understand what you're saying but I expected a better response, this has been going on for years before trump too and in no way shape or form does trump make people be horrible, vile little bastards to each other as responsible adults.. It happens within our own politics in our own country people are vile to each other on social media, so that rules out trump... It's vile

Look past trump, because its been happening for a long time now, it's the way people are becoming, it's going to continue after trump, and its a worry...

 

[Evo1883]

I can find posts from people about many different things, I'm specifically talking about the way people's minds work.. Why they think it's OK to abuse each other online, why they think horrible things are funny... It's a very big social problem that eventually will hinder society, well it already is

 

[Evo1883]

This is from an article in phscology today
"Some cases of social media radicalization have already come to light. The Arab Spring, the Ukrainian Revolution of 2014, and the Armenian revolution of 2018 evolved on social media, where opinions radicalized first, and then action was planned and coordinated. ISIS’ use of social media to recruit fighters, wives, and supporters around the globe resulted in thousands of Western youths travelling to Syria and Iraq. Russia used Facebook and Twitter to try to twist the U.S. electorate with radicalizing posts. Perhaps the most amazing example is the INCEL (involuntarily celibate) movement, which unites losers living in their parents’ basements, and upgrades their personal grievances of sexual failure to the level of a political movement worthy of NYT editorials.


More people every day rely on social media for their news, entertainment and social interactions. What we need is independent research to investigate their potential political effects. Like a Trojan horse, we let these vehicles into our daily lives. Let’s not close our collective eyes to the danger that they can carry."

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Trump is hateful character, so is that response.

The responses of a few who are probably massively anti-Trump are definitely increasing the chance of his re-election. Rioting, looting and damaging property is just playing into his hands at it supports his 'law and order' message. Trump calling out the lawlessness of these people while supporting those who've killed people in the protests is beyond crass.

I know it must be hard to contain the anger and resentment but they can't keep rising to the bait. The more he tries to stoke the fire but they refuse to rise to it the more he'll lose it and go more extreme putting moderates off voting for him.

 

[Evo1883]

I'd prefer if we looked past trump and didn't make this because of trump because its not even scratching the surface, I used this example to show how warped people are becoming through social media influence, and the freedom it's giving people to throw that hate around and its effecta on society.

There are a multitude of other subjects that result in the same extreme nonsense that create more hate and anger
Social media is becoming dangerous, when does it end?

 

[wingy]

I'd prefer if we looked past trump and didn't make this because of trump because its not even scratching the surface, I used this example to show how warped people are becoming through social media influence, and the freedom it's giving people to throw that hate around and its effecta on society.

There are a multitude of other subjects that result in the same extreme nonsense that create more hate and anger
Social media is becoming dangerous, when does it end?

Kind of get you .
But a lot of your examples earlier suggest pan national movements etc .
Many more of those I'm sure and state malign campaigns to.
So to me it is surprising that Trump would divide a nation with such tactics in a percieved bastion of democracy .
Look to home and there are aspects such as Brexit , smaller movements at either extreme guilty of whipping up discontent/anger ,not a lot of violence luckily.
It's polarising,puritanical ,black and white,no grey.
There's scarcely any empathy towards a contrary opinion
Edit:- it would always have had potential exposure,any of these examples but would have required legwork,time,etc .
Exposure and amplification are the issues here.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I'd prefer if we looked past trump and didn't make this because of trump because its not even scratching the surface, I used this example to show how warped people are becoming through social media influence, and the freedom it's giving people to throw that hate around and its effecta on society.

There are a multitude of other subjects that result in the same extreme nonsense that create more hate and anger
Social media is becoming dangerous, when does it end?

It does go beyond that but Trump is also a very good example of the effect of social media and also the way it's increasing being used. He uses it extensively and primarily to create division and animosity and with the kind of influence and scope he has it leads others to use it in a similar way. It's never been the nicest of platforms but it's definitely got worse since Trump became so prominent and IMO that is no coincidence. He tweets unverified, unsubstantiated nonsense and so others do the same.

Even on this board there are sometimes responses that are unnecessarily rude and offensive just due to a difference of 'opinion. Itis possible to disagree with someone yet be courteous and polite in doing so. Just typing c*** doesn't add anything to the argument and IMO detracts from the point you're making, even if it's a decent one.

Another major factor is the anonymity of it. People are emboldened to say things they otherwise wouldn't, and certainly wouldn't face to face, because of that disconnect. Only real cure for that is for each account to have to be verified as belonging to a particular person (not publically available) so any particular content can be traced back and thus make the individual responsible for it and any consequences of that. At the moment it's a free for all and anyone can seemingly write whatever the hell they please regardless of truth or context and because it's global and instantaneous by the time it's been debunked millions of people can have seen it and been taken in by it, then repeated it so it spreads further. That is a Pandora's box and I don't see how it can go back in.

It certainly needs to be brought up to date in regards to libel as well.

 

[wingy]

It's setting us back as a species by at least a couple of millennia.

 

[shmmeee]

Yeah the Internet has fucked out political conversation.

This response is no different to many on there tbh..
See I understand what you're saying but I expected a better response, this has been going on for years before trump too and in no way shape or form does trump make people be horrible, vile little bastards to each other as responsible adults.. It happens within our own politics in our own country people are vile to each other on social media, so that rules out trump... It's vile

Look past trump, because its been happening for a long time now, it's the way people are becoming, it's going to continue after trump, and its a worry...

Is it though?

All these videos seem to come from a few isolated places like Portland or somewhere like the RNC which will attract the crazies.

I often wonder how much it’s actually happening. Was talking to a friend this week who got heavily into the Tommy Robinson stuff online and almost everything became a conversation about immigration with him. I asked “how much does it impact you in real life?” We agreed that the worst part of social media was making you angry about things that in reality don’t exist in your world.

As always, this video is excellent on the topic:

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

It's setting us back as a species by at least a couple of millennia.

I guess the encouraging thing I've seen recently is more people saying they're spending less time on it or deleting it altogether, so it could end up becoming less influential.

However, I can't say if that's true across the generations as my information will invariably be from a small group who on the whole similar to me. Those of an age that remember pre-social media and how it was with predominantly face to face conversations and on the phone, which seemed more civilised and polite.

Younger generation this will be almost all they've known in terms of interaction with people in the wider world so can't relate it being different. This animosity and intolerance to opposing views may well be norm for them and showing any kind of civility to it is nothing more than weakness.

 

[Evo1883]

Yeah the Internet has fucked out political conversation.


Is it though?

All these videos seem to come from a few isolated places like Portland or somewhere like the RNC which will attract the crazies.

I often wonder how much it’s actually happening. Was talking to a friend this week who got heavily into the Tommy Robinson stuff online and almost everything became a conversation about immigration with him. I asked “how much does it impact you in real life?” We agreed that the worst part of social media was making you angry about things that in reality don’t exist in your world.

As always, this video is excellent on the topic:

I hear you and I don't disagree, today il give an example of nasty behaviour on social media.. Reese mogg don't know how you spell it... Put a picture of his kids up today on twitter, don't like the guy much at all... However there are several very unnecessary comments in the replies... One saying his kids will deserve all the bullying that comes to them... It's vile behaviour
Another, Owen Jones.. I dislike him, don't agree with his nauseating rants, but I wouldn't go on his Twitter and call him a fucking puff, a faggot etc etc like people do ... It's just a free for all on social media

 

[skybluetony176]

My advice is turn your back on politics of hate. When Obama was campaigning against John McCain he repeatedly made the point that the people had a clear choice. Vote for his campaign of hope or vote for McCains campaign of fear. I think that was the last time I saw that in the English speaking world.

The referendum was a campaign of fear from both sides. No one was saying vote for in or out for positive reasons (unless you believed a lie on the side of a bus, which apparently no one did now), it was all don’t vote the other way because of (insert scaremongering here).

Next GE I’d love to see a campaign of hope not fear from all sides. The direction of travel on mindset needs to change because having spent large parts of my childhood in Northern Ireland during the troubles I’ve been here before. Hate and fear breeds more hate and fear which breeds violence. You could literally feel it in the air in Northern Ireland in the 70’s and 80’s like you had developed a new sense just to detect it, the area’s I spent my time mostly wasn’t even anywhere near as bad as areas of Belfast, (London) Derry etc but you could still feel it. I don’t get that feeling anymore when visiting Northern Ireland. I do get it in England though.

Just like Northern Ireland during the troubles England and Wales has been played by agents of doom, fear and hatred. They’ll ride of into the sunset and we’ll be left to pick up the pieces. The saddest thing is we did it willingly.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

Things like the Popish Plot stirred hatred of catholics. Plenty of handbills across the ages that have stoked racial hatred etc. Letters to papers in the 19th century weren't always sweetness and light.

What you have... is more access to response, more awareness of response, and that sometimes distorts perception of the response itself, makes it seem more than it was.

But it was always out there. Human nature runs a wide range of people and personalities, from the deviant, to the bigoted, to the insane, to the actually quite decent.

 

[shmmeee]

I do think there’s an element of the Internet trending young and young people being more certain and vociferous in their arguments. Also the Internet attract people with low social skills and mental disorders.

I hear you and I don't disagree, today il give an example of nasty behaviour on social media.. Reese mogg don't know how you spell it... Put a picture of his kids up today on twitter, don't like the guy much at all... However there are several very unnecessary comments in the replies... One saying his kids will deserve all the bullying that comes to them... It's vile behaviour
Another, Owen Jones.. I dislike him, don't agree with his nauseating rants, but I wouldn't go on his Twitter and call him a fucking puff, a faggot etc etc like people do ... It's just a free for all on social media

Yeah anonymity + communication = dickhead. Always. I guess my point is though what does it matter?

I remember when my Dad was leader of the council constant abuse, letters in the telegraph, phone calls, some rando having a go at me in Pool Meadow calling Dad a Nazi, all sorts. All before the Internet was a thing. But it was still just a few weirdos and didn’t really impact life that much.

Obviously Jones got attacked IRL, but generally I’d be surprised if any of the people in the Twitter comments would say that stuff in person.

That said Ive had arguments with people I’ve known for 25 years claiming I’m a liberal snowflake or support communism or something because I vote Labour. So maybe it does bleed through.

What do you do? Can’t put the genie back in the bottle.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

That said Ive had arguments with people I’ve known for 25 years claiming I’m a liberal snowflake or support communism or something because I vote Labour. So maybe it does bleed through.

But then the first post-war election tried to paint the Labour Party as having similarities with the National Socialists.

You'll always get the nutter out there!

 

[shmmeee]

But then the first post-war election tried to paint the Labour Party as having similarities with the National Socialists.

You'll always get the nutter out there!

It was more the fact that we’d been discussing politics for decades and he knew my views, but that was overridden by the YouTube vids he’d seen that told him o was a fascist communist (I know).

 

[NorthernWisdom]

It was more the fact that we’d been discussing politics for decades and he knew my views, but that was overridden by the YouTube vids he’d seen that told him o was a fascist communist (I know).

Today's youtube video is yesterday's pamphlet or handbill.

If people want to mirror a view, they'll find it.

 

[wingy]

Today's youtube video is yesterday's pamphlet or handbill.

If people want to mirror a view, they'll find it.

So it scales it up and shortens the response,increasing the weight.

 

[Evo1883]

Il be honest. I don't know what can be done.. I believe plenty of bad things, incidents etc can be attributed to social media influence.. That little twat who shot and killed somebody the other day, I wonder how much social media influenced him... Scary tbh

 

[NorthernWisdom]

So it scales it up and shortens the response,increasing the weight.

Nah, it shifts and shuffles it more. The weight of response has been far worse in the past, because it's been easier to portray a homogenous line.

Now you get multiple voices, with most of them being nobodies. The difference is, if people choose to listen to the nobodies, and think they're actually a somebody. The counter to that is it's easy to find the origin nowadays and stamp it down, you just have to do it with many,

The best way to combat any extreme behaviour is to not give it the attention it deserves. It's always been there, it's always had a negative effect if people take it seriously and give weight to it.

I will add, however, the decline of the authority of experts is worrying.

What the modern world is, is different. Difference creates uncertainty and instability among people who see the difference happen, and don't / can't / won't keep up. It doesn't make it better or worse however, it just has its own challenges.

 

[Evo1883]

Nah, it shifts and shuffles it more. The weight of response has been far worse in the past, because it's been easier to portray a homogenous line.

Now you get multiple voices, with most of them being nobodies. The difference is, if people choose to listen to the nobodies, and think they're actually a somebody. The counter to that is it's easy to find the origin nowadays and stamp it down, you just have to do it with many,

The best way to combat any extreme behaviour is to not give it the attention it deserves. It's always been there, it's always had a negative effect if people take it seriously and give weight to it.

I will add, however, the decline of the authority of experts is worrying.

The difference being is the volume at which you're being fed negative information is at levels humans have never experienced.. And it's a constant stream of it..

Obviously somebody has to come across it, but intruiging hash tags, shared videos etc can all start a chain of overwhelming negativity, how we process that is going to vary

 

[NorthernWisdom]

The difference being is the volume at which you're being fed negative information is at levels humans have never experienced.. And it's a constant stream of it..

Obviously somebody has to come a cross it, but intruiging hash tags, shared videos etc can all start a chain of overwhelming negativity, how we process that is going to vary

You're not being fed it, you choose to find it.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

The difference being is the volume at which you're being fed negative information is at levels humans have never experienced.. And it's a constant stream of it..

Obviously somebody has to come across it, but intruiging hash tags, shared videos etc can all start a chain of overwhelming negativity, how we process that is going to vary

Yep, difference between now and then is speed and scope. Type a few sentences and it can be seen around the world in seconds.

 

[Evo1883]

You're not being fed it, you choose to find it.

I absolutely agree that this is the case most of the time, however with people sharing videos and content, people you follow or are friends with, alot of the time I found myself watching content out of curiosity without knowing the true nature of the video, I read a shared post, it's not always you looking for it, it's like walking in on somebody half naked, you didn't expect it

 

[Otis]

Things like the Popish Plot stirred hatred of catholics. Plenty of handbills across the ages that have stoked racial hatred etc. Letters to papers in the 19th century weren't always sweetness and light.

What you have... is more access to response, more awareness of response, and that sometimes distorts perception of the response itself, makes it seem more than it was.

But it was always out there. Human nature runs a wide range of people and personalities, from the deviant, to the bigoted, to the insane, to the actually quite decent.

You rang?

 

[Evo1883]

Case in point, I once saw a video about China and its markets... I had no idea it would shift to a dog having its face blowtorched by them... It was horrifying and left an extremely negative impression on me

 

[NorthernWisdom]

You rang?

There's a panel game show in there somewhere. Deviant, Bigoted, Decent? Bring on a special guest, and each team has to guess which they are. Throw in an amusing host who can adlib well, and you've got a ratings winner.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

There's a panel game show in there somewhere. Deviant, Bigoted, Decent? Bring on a special guest, and each team has to guess which they are. Throw in an amusing host who can adlib well, and you've got a ratings winner.

Wasn't that essentially what the last Tory leadership contest was?

 

[Evo1883]

You also have to question the effects of social media on people's mental health, especially children

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

You're not being fed it, you choose to find it.

But it can find you with the algorithms that make the suggestions to related content.

Of course it doesn't force you to watch or clink links but iftdoes to a certain extent 'find you' and therefore entrench a view by finding others that think the same. It could be argued that that kind of thing adds to the problem because it creates this bubble of like minded opinions who largely agree with one another so when outside that bubble and people don't it's a shock and tolerance of that other opinion is massively diminished. We've had football hooliganism where the only crime is daring to support another team.

 

[fernandopartridge]

You're not being fed it, you choose to find it.

To an extent, but social media and algorithms enables it to find you as well

 

[NorthernWisdom]

To an extent, but social media and algorithms enables it to find you as well

But those algorithms will be based on what you're already searching for / looking at anyway.

And nobody forces you to look at it, either.

Plus there are adblockers etc.

To tell the truth, I find the impact of social media as being vastly overstated. It's not some top down effect where people mindlessly consume and have it forced upon them, people choose to consume. If anything, there's a more fragmented consumption than in the past, so the ability to create a single message is harder. What there *is* is the ability to sow confusion as to the role of expertise, authority, cultural value in what people say, as we don't regulate with the same authoritarian top-down approach we used to.

 

[Evo1883]

But those algorithms will be based on what you're already searching for / looking at anyway.

And nobody forces you to look at it, either.

Plus there are adblockers etc.

To tell the truth, I find the impact of social media as being vastly overstated. It's not some top down effect where people mindlessly consume and have it forced upon them, people choose to consume.

That is 100% correct but also the most simplistic way of looking at it, it's like the yanks saying guns don't kill people people kill people... Whilst correct, is way too simplistic