I'd like to point out that one facet missing in this conversation is the distinction between "most people" and "most people on Twitter." I agree most people *on Twitter* area hungry for good-to-bad narratives. I think that's because most people *on Twitter* are more inclined to be cynical already, and more bad-to-good stories justify their cynicism. They/we laugh or cringe at good-to-bad, saccharine stories. That's what Facebook is for, isn't it.
Stuff like this is why I'm happy to be off Twitter. Largest collection of people who need therapy and counseling, because there's no way this is how healthy people should be functioning.
It is a strange situation to be someone like me, who is extremely online, and who has very serious things that I'm actually trying to atone for, and yet to only get bad faith and uninformed invocations of those things, or just usual trolling internet garbage. I've written about it at length because it seems like the only thing I can do. But people frequently bring that stuff up - which is cool, I did it - but never with the kind of minimal commitment to understanding, or even getting the basic facts straight, that could engender something meaningful. Including meaningfully condemning/rejecting/denouncing me! Because when people ostensibly want to invoke what I did to attack me, but can't get even basic details about it right, they can't possibly hurt me. How can you be moved by criticism if it has so little to do with the situation they're talking about? So it's no good for everybody.
I've been saying "the internet is no good for anything and it sucks and we should all get off of it" for at least a decade, but even in that context, the last couple years seem to have made anything even resembling meaningful engagement (including angry engagement) impossible. It's just people relentlessly attacking caricatures and strawmen that they see as their enemies in some battle between social cultures, almost purely to signal allegiance to a certain group of people rather than to say or do anything. It's just all so pointless.
America did a terrible thing with its history of slavery and apartheid that lasted for centuries. All Americans are damaged by such ill deeds. Even those who witness a horrible crime are damaged by it. A black man was fired from his job for using the "n" word colloquially. He did not invent this word, nor did he make it into a slur, yet he suffers today from the ill deeds of some white people from the past. Everybody suffers from it. These people that you speak of are not exempt. We all suffer. One will fail at attempting to just rationalize the consequences away.
To sum up this piece: Social media is evil because it sometimes goes after leftist heroes. Firing Wilder for her pro-palestinian tweets was evil. Judgement must be suspended on Kemper because, you know, she might be a good leftist now. Peter Theil, however. What happened to him was just because he practiced 'wrong-think.' Ditto Trump. And Ben Shapiro is just dehumanizing these noble victims (except Theil and Trump, who fully deserve what happened to them) by pointing out that this is the American version of Mao's Cultural Revolutionaries.
So, keep tearing down those statues. Eliminate all thought except leftist thought to protect freedom for our posterity.
This parasocial relationship was one that I examined in pretty great depth after some truly disturbing accusations were levied against a once-favorite musical artist of mine (if you take into account that I am a white guy in his mid-30s who loves sad bastard y'allternative music, you can probably guess who in fewer than 3 attempts).
Ultimately, I landed in a place where I realized that any single action I took (sticking around or Brexiting a fandom) was unlikely to have any impact because the power that person held came from a passionate collective of fans and one apostate was unlikely to affect that body of mass. However, my conscience dictates that I no longer engage in the person's art, as that would still be participating in the collective power structure that allowed the man to predate on others.
Not sure where this leads to in the Ellie Kemper case, but I'm sure we'll get a number of think-pieces in 2-3 days about "what it all means."
It sounds as if the author is making excuses for the 'flattening' or more simply the purposeful; ignorance of context so as to justify Woke religious behaviors such as cancelling. e.g. "Many of the current conversations about power and accountability are conversations we desperately need to have."
Mostly we don't. The 'conversations' don't exist to do anything but shift power. It's a form of stealing that no sane human should condone. If it's Woke it's not based on reason, justice or any level of understanding. It's all about power and self-righteousness.
Pfui! The article is all about "influencers" and "celebrities" and other essentially meaningless people about whom no one actually cares. Me? I have meaningful conversations with my FB friends, many of whom are talented artists (some even famous) and many others are just regular people who don't give a flying expletive who I was forty years ago.
One of the behaviors I’ve noticed is the transfer of moral authority away from traditional institutions (churches, synagogues, temples, mosques, etc…). Moral authority is now vested in corporations via their CSR initiatives and/or social media influencers.
I'd like to point out that one facet missing in this conversation is the distinction between "most people" and "most people on Twitter." I agree most people *on Twitter* area hungry for good-to-bad narratives. I think that's because most people *on Twitter* are more inclined to be cynical already, and more bad-to-good stories justify their cynicism. They/we laugh or cringe at good-to-bad, saccharine stories. That's what Facebook is for, isn't it.
Why the fuck was this on my firefox homepage this is all a simulation stop with your fake intellectual garbage
Stuff like this is why I'm happy to be off Twitter. Largest collection of people who need therapy and counseling, because there's no way this is how healthy people should be functioning.
Great write-up.
It is a strange situation to be someone like me, who is extremely online, and who has very serious things that I'm actually trying to atone for, and yet to only get bad faith and uninformed invocations of those things, or just usual trolling internet garbage. I've written about it at length because it seems like the only thing I can do. But people frequently bring that stuff up - which is cool, I did it - but never with the kind of minimal commitment to understanding, or even getting the basic facts straight, that could engender something meaningful. Including meaningfully condemning/rejecting/denouncing me! Because when people ostensibly want to invoke what I did to attack me, but can't get even basic details about it right, they can't possibly hurt me. How can you be moved by criticism if it has so little to do with the situation they're talking about? So it's no good for everybody.
I've been saying "the internet is no good for anything and it sucks and we should all get off of it" for at least a decade, but even in that context, the last couple years seem to have made anything even resembling meaningful engagement (including angry engagement) impossible. It's just people relentlessly attacking caricatures and strawmen that they see as their enemies in some battle between social cultures, almost purely to signal allegiance to a certain group of people rather than to say or do anything. It's just all so pointless.
This is really good piece with some excellent, colorful language that I look forward to quoting. Thank you for tackling this complicated problem.
America did a terrible thing with its history of slavery and apartheid that lasted for centuries. All Americans are damaged by such ill deeds. Even those who witness a horrible crime are damaged by it. A black man was fired from his job for using the "n" word colloquially. He did not invent this word, nor did he make it into a slur, yet he suffers today from the ill deeds of some white people from the past. Everybody suffers from it. These people that you speak of are not exempt. We all suffer. One will fail at attempting to just rationalize the consequences away.
To sum up this piece: Social media is evil because it sometimes goes after leftist heroes. Firing Wilder for her pro-palestinian tweets was evil. Judgement must be suspended on Kemper because, you know, she might be a good leftist now. Peter Theil, however. What happened to him was just because he practiced 'wrong-think.' Ditto Trump. And Ben Shapiro is just dehumanizing these noble victims (except Theil and Trump, who fully deserve what happened to them) by pointing out that this is the American version of Mao's Cultural Revolutionaries.
So, keep tearing down those statues. Eliminate all thought except leftist thought to protect freedom for our posterity.
Can you guys shut the fuck up about the internet ON THE INTERNET? Stop invading our home. Assholes.
I couldn't agree more this. It's why I view the internet as more of a tool then anything else now.
This parasocial relationship was one that I examined in pretty great depth after some truly disturbing accusations were levied against a once-favorite musical artist of mine (if you take into account that I am a white guy in his mid-30s who loves sad bastard y'allternative music, you can probably guess who in fewer than 3 attempts).
Ultimately, I landed in a place where I realized that any single action I took (sticking around or Brexiting a fandom) was unlikely to have any impact because the power that person held came from a passionate collective of fans and one apostate was unlikely to affect that body of mass. However, my conscience dictates that I no longer engage in the person's art, as that would still be participating in the collective power structure that allowed the man to predate on others.
Not sure where this leads to in the Ellie Kemper case, but I'm sure we'll get a number of think-pieces in 2-3 days about "what it all means."
Hi! I sent you a question/message on discord re: this. I love this piece. Thanks :)
It sounds as if the author is making excuses for the 'flattening' or more simply the purposeful; ignorance of context so as to justify Woke religious behaviors such as cancelling. e.g. "Many of the current conversations about power and accountability are conversations we desperately need to have."
Mostly we don't. The 'conversations' don't exist to do anything but shift power. It's a form of stealing that no sane human should condone. If it's Woke it's not based on reason, justice or any level of understanding. It's all about power and self-righteousness.
Pfui! The article is all about "influencers" and "celebrities" and other essentially meaningless people about whom no one actually cares. Me? I have meaningful conversations with my FB friends, many of whom are talented artists (some even famous) and many others are just regular people who don't give a flying expletive who I was forty years ago.
It's truly a galaxy brained thing to call a flat something one dimensional. Kindly explain what that even looks like.
I always thought of the internet as a giant cesspool.
One of the behaviors I’ve noticed is the transfer of moral authority away from traditional institutions (churches, synagogues, temples, mosques, etc…). Moral authority is now vested in corporations via their CSR initiatives and/or social media influencers.