If there’s one thing I’d hoped people had learned going into the next four years of Donald Trump as president, it’s that spending lots of time online posting about what people in power are saying and doing is not going to accomplish anything. If anything, it’s exactly what they want.
Many of my journalist colleagues have attempted to beat back the tide under banners like “fighting disinformation” and “accountability.” While these efforts are admirable, the past few years have changed my own internal calculus. Thinkers like Jean-Paul Sartre and Hannah Arendt warned us that the point of this deluge is not to persuade, but to overwhelm and paralyze our capacity to act. More recently, researchers have found that the viral outrage disseminated on social media in response to these ridiculous claims actually reduces the effectiveness of collective action. The result is a media environment that keeps us in a state of debilitating fear and anger, endlessly reacting to our oppressors instead of organizing against them.
Cross’ book contains a meticulous catalog of social media sins which many people who follow and care about current events are probably guilty of—myself very much included. She documents how tech platforms encourage us, through their design affordances, to post and seethe and doomscroll into the void, always reacting and never acting.
But perhaps the greatest of these sins is convincing ourselves that posting is a form of political activism, when it is at best a coping mechanism—an individualist solution to problems that can only be solved by collective action. This, says Cross, is the primary way tech platforms atomize and alienate us, creating “a solipsism that says you are the main protagonist in a sea of NPCs.”
In the days since the inauguration, I’ve watched people on Bluesky and Instagram fall into these same old traps. My timeline is full of reactive hot takes and gotchas by people who still seem to think they can quote-dunk their way out of fascism—or who know they can’t, but simply can’t resist taking the bait. The media is more than willing to work up their appetites. Legacy news outlets cynically chase clicks (and ad dollars) by disseminating whatever sensational nonsense those in power are spewing.
This in turn fuels yet another round of online outrage, edgy takes, and screenshots exposing the “hypocrisy” of people who never cared about being seen as hypocrites, because that’s not the point. Even violent fantasies about putting billionaires to the guillotine are rendered inept in these online spaces—just another pressure release valve to harmlessly dissipate our rage instead of compelling ourselves to organize and act.
This is the opposite of what media, social or otherwise, is supposed to do. Of course it’s important to stay informed, and journalists can still provide the valuable information we need to take action. But this process has been short-circuited by tech platforms and a media environment built around seeking reaction for its own sake.
“For most people, social media gives you this sense that unless you care about everything, you care about nothing. You must try to swallow the world while it’s on fire,” said Cross. “But we didn’t evolve to be able to absorb this much info. It makes you devalue the work you can do in your community.”
It’s not that social media is fundamentally evil or bereft of any good qualities. Some of my best post-Twitter moments have been spent goofing around with mutuals on Bluesky, or waxing romantic about the joys of human creativity and art-making in an increasingly AI-infested world. But when it comes to addressing the problems we face, no amount of posting or passive info consumption is going to substitute the hard, unsexy work of organizing.
The revoltion will not be televised - Gill Scott Heron
Even people agreeing with this are wary of any revolution which is not in some way being televised. And more trusting to television than to what they can see with their own eyes.
I can’t upvote this strongly enough. Social media is doing everything in the establishment’s favor - especially ingraining the habit of glancing at a news item and making an instant value judgement with minimal thought before scrolling along to the next item. It’s not just that endless scrolling and venting take time away from real action, it’s the encouragement of superficial thinking. People who get all their info from memes are solid gold to con men like Trump who depend on triggering stupid conclusions. They got conservatives to worship him by not thinking too much, and they can do the same to liberals.
After working with computer software most of my life I’ve come to understand that if success relies on people ‘paying attention to something, making an informed decision and then performing an action’ that it is nearly impossible to get the desired outcome more than half the time.
We’re so fucked.
Also in that field, but… I think you have to acknowledge that being, usually, in your example 1) at work and 2) on a computer, make people that much less interested in giving a shit. Compare to various systems people use in their free time, and you probably see that people are pretty good at attending to the things they think matter.
Capitalism, or, at the very very least, unfettered capitalism, are the real problem, not people writ large.
in my workshop I keep safety glasses at each station, and then some more just around. I bought 6 pairs of the same model after trying out 8-10 different styles so they fit and work well also. I still need to force myself sometimes to take 3 steps to put them on.
The people who sit down to put together a solution for our mess will need to plan this way too. They will need to factor in how to make it easy for people. How to get the desired path of the chaotic group to align with the solution.
For an idea, I have been thinking a lot about decentralization like here at lemmy. What if, the government, was social media. What if each post was a proposal, and the up and down votes were actual votes. It could replace all politicians. No more lobbyists paying $5k for policy implementation. They would need to bribe us all, which would just be us getting better quality of life. A system without centralized power.
If it was in the top 3 apps in the mainstream repositories millions would stumble into it on their own.
Agreed. After 30 years working in IT for various companies from 40 employees to 300,000 employees, I believe about 70-80% of the corporate work force has an elementary school level of reading comprehension at best.
In the last 10 years of my career I stopped writing emails with more than 1 question, because otherwise most people would reply and only answer the first thing I asked (often poorly), ignoring the entire rest of the email.
I mean 54% read at or below a 6th grade level, so that makes sense. Almost a fifth to a half of adult Americans are functionally illiterate depending on how you define it.
I agree.
“Planet’s burning up, another genocide, fascism on the rise… ugh… where are the funny memes.”
Apathy is the greatest tool of the oppressor.
And boredom is a crime.
Apathy is the greatest tool of the oppressor.
apathy is the tool of the strong in the times of the weak.
It’s probably boomers’ fault for creating PCs so GenX could create the Internet. They should have seen this coming!!!
The blame can be placed accurately: https://www.quora.com/Who-invented-the-modern-computer-look-and-feel/answer/Harri-K-Hiltunen
Why read the article (especially if there’s a paywall) when you can read - or even better make - the comments? 😜
Seriously, if the goal is that sweet sweet dopamine fix, then this is the most efficient means to achieve that end…
Thinking is hard, hence just don’t do it! Better yet, downvote those who do as being “pretentious”.
It’s far easier to talk
rather than listenover others.Social media is doing everything in the establishment’s favor
For about half a second, people used social media to organize. Then the fascists saw how to manipulate and control it, and jumped at the opportunity. At this point social media – especially billionaire controlled social media – is just part of the fascist apparatus.
To a lesser extent, as this article talks about, the coping mechanism of posting through better platforms allows you to vent enough to prevent you from having the discomfort necessary to actually do anything. It’s not nearly as harmful, but it’s not good either.
They have done the same to liberals, just in a different way. Why do the harder thing when the easier thing is just as good? Most liberals already believe bullshit just as convenient for Trump.
How you support or not support an idea is not less important than what is that idea.
As someone who is outside the US, the best I can do is share important information with people inside the US.
I would be very surprised if any of our US-Allied governments call out Trump. I would be overjoyed, but surprised.
Sure you can. Fight online propaganda with online propaganda.
Even violent fantasies about putting billionaires to the guillotine are rendered inept in these online spaces—just another pressure release valve to harmlessly dissipate our rage instead of compelling ourselves to organize and act.
ahem lemmy
Maybe we won’t be guillotining them anytime soon, but we can at least slow their roll: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVgNJf6CsBA
“I’m glad there’s OxyContin and video games to keep those people quiet”, allegedly - Andreessen
Thanks for sharing this article. What a disgustingly crass sentiment
What a useless pile of words spent moaning about ad clicks, specifically to gain ad clicks.
Don’t talk, “organize.”
Okay, how? How do we effectively organize to fight against an enemy who has already for all intents and purposes won, in a way that won’t get us rounded up and shot by the Gestapo? Please tell us.
“We don’t know, that’s your problem. Just ‘organize.’”
You’re already on a decentralized platform that can be used to help with that. You can also make plans with a close group of friends/family you trust to figure out ways you can help resist. Use encrypted communications platforms to talk to them. There’s plenty of ways to do stuff beyond apathetic doomerism.
You won’t find such on Lemmy, we are far too niche here, and we barely have “news” that isn’t using Arch btw.
But AOC gave a talk a couple days ago if that’s what you are looking for: https://youtu.be/CVgNJf6CsBA. (And yes, I searched, but Lemmy has no matches to any variation of this link that I tried. Meanwhile it’s all over Bluesky and Reddit. Make of that what you will.)
So what is the alternative? If we log off, what exactly are we supposed to do instead? How are we supposed to get information without constantly raising our antennae into the noxious cumulonimbus cloud of social media?
It isn’t quite as simple as “touch grass,” but it also sort of is.
Trusted information networks have existed since long before the internet and mass media. These networks are in every town and city, and at their core are real relationships between neighbors—not their online, parasocial simulacra.
Here in New York City, in the week since the inauguration, I’ve seen large groups mobilize to defend migrants from anticipated ICE raids and provide warm food and winter clothes for the unhoused after the city closed shelters and abandoned people in sub-freezing temperatures. Similar efforts are underway in Chicago, where ICE reportedly arrested more than 100 people, and in other cities where ICE has planned or attempted raids, with volunteers assigned to keep watch over key locations where migrants are most vulnerable.
A few weeks earlier, residents created ad-hoc mutual aid distros in Los Angeles to provide food and essentials for those displaced by the wildfires. The coordinated efforts gave Angelenos a lifeline during the crisis, cutting through the false claims spreading on social media about looting and out-of-state fire trucks being stopped for “emissions testing.” Many mutual aid groups in Los Angeles have not just been helping people affected by the fires but have also focused on distributing information about how to learn about and resist ICE raids in Los Angeles. It is no surprise that some of the largest and most coordinated protests in the early days of Trump’s term have happened in Los Angeles, where thousands of anti-ICE protesters shut down the 101 highway and several streets in downtown Los Angeles Sunday.
Some of these efforts were coordinated online over Discord and secure messaging apps, but all of them arose from existing networks of neighbors and community organizers, some of whom have been organizing for decades.
Get on the streets and see who else is there and organize with them the old fashioned gen-x way.
The article is full of examples of ways people have organized.
getting the fediverse into the mainstream should be our focus, a single entity will not be able to silence anyone
when it comes to addressing the problems we face, no amount of posting or passive info consumption is going to substitute the hard, unsexy work of organizing.
The fediverse is great, but the problem is that it isn’t organizing. It isn’t mobilizing people to scare politicians and businesses into behaving better.
true
It’s a medium for organizing. You should act in your community how you think best and let people who want to ensure we have non-corporate communications be.
So why are we talking - nothing gives me any indication you are in the same community as me (odds are strongly against it), so nothing is being organized. The world needs more ways to organize communities not large groups who don’t have a small communities in common to do something about.
One of the problems with online forums for organizing is that it’s hard to naturally build an organizational structure. It’s possible, but I think it requires experienced organizers to start choosing collaborators from the userbase.
- in online forums, people get upvoted based on how much users agree with the comment. They are rewarded for being popular, not for having a direct impact on the problem being discussed.
- IRL people who commit effort to the cause get a certain amount of social capital, and the satisfaction of having an effect. They also form social bonds with other people in the group. Participants are rewarded for having an effect.
We haven’t seen a lot of organizing boiling out of the existing forums (Reddit, Facebook, blogs) and microblogging (Twitter) platforms. There have been a bunch of leaderless movements, like #metoo and BLM, but those have had a moment and then faded out. If they were effective tools for organizing, I would expect to see more organizations come out of them and persist.
Conversely, volunteer community organizations form all the time - people are physically situated near people experiencing similar problems who are invested in solutions they think will work for their community. In-person organization is self perpetuating in the sense that there is an inherent reward for having an effect.
I think it’s possible to use online tools to create a movement, but like the author of the article says, most of us spend our time posting and upvoting rather than doing something that will change policy.
Anyway … You’re sitting here posting on a fuckin forum. Go do something.
But when it comes to addressing the problems we face, no amount of posting or passive info consumption is going to substitute the hard, unsexy work of organizing.
No shit, so when I’d say this in year 2013, it wasn’t worthless nerd screeching aimed at satisfying my hunger for attention which I don’t get because I’m a worthless nerd and can’t accept the new world where tech helps, you know, normal socialized people, not like me, to fix every problem with their mutual likes and reposts and flashmobs.
Seems damn clear that radio reproductors on German streets didn’t help against Nazism.
I would argue that journalism is necessary, just not sufficient, for moving into the future.
Ironically this is true for every one of the myriad sides in this conflict.
I recall a sci-fi book from CS Lewis… anyway my point is that this was well known after WWII, and probably often had to be rediscovered throughout history. Strong societies produce weak children and so on. We’ve had our Yin, now time for the karmic Yang to brutalize us for being so extremely negligent.
Maybe it’s better to refrain from growing strong men, though, just average will do, with average children, not weak.
ADD:
Also from LOTR, a smart thing in the same direction, I think one can find most of Tao Te Ching and Art of War rephrased in LOTR.
“Other evils there are that may come; for Sauron is himself but a servant or emissary. Yet it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till. What weather they shall have is not ours to rule”
I’m not sure how it is possible to produce merely average people though? Anyway, even if humanity itself were to not change, the world around us still does. Perhaps one day aliens will show up, assuming that climate change doesn’t kill us all in the moderate term future. Just like all those species of animals and plants and such that we’ve driven extinct: they lasted so long, but then could not survive us.
So I would argue that we always should remain strong… it’s just that the definition of what that even means will constantly keep changing, in response to our circumstances.
But, Stoicism, yeah - it’s literally all that we can do, so let’s do that.:-)
I’m not sure how it is possible to produce merely average people though?
Not getting excited with global solutions and utopias. At some point in my 12-15 I considered libertarianism a far wiser ideology than the rest due to this, but then noticed how there are libertarian utopias emerging for all tastes. Panarchy (that’s not yet a thing), agorism (that to some extent is, with cryptocurrencies and internet connectivity) and maybe something else.
Any wise construct stops being wise if you rely on it too much.
So people thinking “correctly” are not those you want to have, people familiar with good things, but not invested too much, are.
If you build a construct (say, in a game like Civilization) with -7 modifier to fascism, then the humanity will regulate to that and negate the modifier. Then your construct crumbles, and the humanity gets +7 to fascism. Was it really a good idea in the first place then?
So I would argue that we always should remain strong… it’s just that the definition of what that even means will constantly keep changing, in response to our circumstances.
And that means that trying to remain strong we’ll waste effort in all directions instead of having some when needed.
But, Stoicism, yeah - it’s literally all that we can do, so let’s do that.:-)
Stoicism is about spending effort where you should and not spending when you shouldn’t. It’s not pure inaction, it’s the way to do less nonsense.
EDIT: Or the biblical example with 7 abundant years and 7 hungry years - imagine taking all the increase in food for granted, many more children being born, many more slaves brought in, expecting to be able to pay many more debts perhaps, thus taking more, and then during hungry years not only the difference in population dying, but more (because those who die from hunger still consume food before it, those who are used to eating more need more to survive, some debt payments can’t be postponed, and a weaker state spends more resources to defend its borders).
Humans seem not to be great planners - we are too short-sighted and selfish, but like in a bad way where we first lie to ourselves, and then also to one another.
This allows us to get out of local minima as we spread to new areas, but that same trait seems equally likely to lead to our extinction when all areas have been found and we need rather to switch to a more stablilzed society, yet won’t bc we don’t feel like doing so.
Such situations would regularly arise till early XX century and even now, so, eh, humanity tries everything. I wouldn’t assume I know a solution.
Agree, best thing we can do is starve their platforms and deny them advertising revenue. Just delete our accounts.
If you must be on those platforms (because face it, that is where grandma is) don’t doom scroll. I block all from the creator of shared memes on facebook - then when I block two I use that as a sign I’m done for the day. You should follow similar rules - make it clear that you want social media for social purposes and the memes, information (which is likely false or exaggerated), and everything else is not welcome to you. Alone you and I are nothing, but together we start to become a statistics that they will notice. Thus my plea that you follow similar rules as me in blocking the non-social parts and not doom scrolling - if there are enough of us they will be forced to make their platform more useful to keep us for one more ad.
TLDR - We need more Luigis against the techbros
Luigi 1 didn’t accomplish anything, though.
You’re talking about it.
I’m talking about a guy who made no impact on a single company much less an industry and then went to jail awaiting prison, throwing away all of his rich boy ivy league education, because people like YOU keep bringing him up.
I’m talking about a guy
Since you’re refusing to back up your stance I take that to mean you’ve resigned from the argument and that you agree with me.
Back up my stance of “you’re talking about it” when you start your comment with “I’m talking about it”?
I really don’t see a reason to “back that up” any further. You did all for me.
I see you have the memory of the goldfish so I’ll recap the discussion for you.
-
User above stated we need more luigis
-
I brought up the fact that Luigi 1 accomplished nothing
-
You retort that we are talking about it
So either your response was completely pointless and off topic or you meant it as evidence that Luigi 1 accomplished something. What did he accomplish? How does talking about it change anything for anyone?
-
He traded his life for another. He showed the world that it’s possible. And “we” outnumber “them”. Making people realize that is an achievement in itself.
Would you say people like Rosa Parks “didn’t accomplish anything”?
“They” actually won the recent election meaning “they” are actually the majority. The only way for “us” to accomplish anything other than constant bloodshed and a near 50/50 civil war scenario is to convince a bunch of “them” to change the system with “us”.
We’re not fighting a dozen people like Brian Thompson, we’re fighting tens of millions of idiots who empower them.
First, people supporting Trump are not the majority by any metric. They are 49.8% of the people who voted, which is 31,8% of the eligible voters and 23,3% of the total us population. You could argue that the majority of people “don’t hate” Trump, and while that’s still a scary metric, it’s not the point that I wanted to make.
“They” aren’t Republicans or Trump supporters, they’re wealth-hoarding billionaires that actively make people’s lives worse. As it has already been said, support for Luigi is pretty much bipartisan. Nearly everyone hates those people, and even plenty of people who voted Trump did it because they see him as “one of the people” (for some godforsaken reason). They’re propagandized into voting Republican through all the culture war, misinformation and fear mongering, but when people like Brian Thompson die, no one is actually sad and a lot actually celebrate.
Trump does indeed have a personality cult, but from what I’ve gathered the great majority of people voting him aren’t part of that and they don’t actually like him, it’s just that they hate “the gays”, “the libs”, or “the immigrants” more.
Anybody who didn’t vote for the party who opposes Trump but was eligible is actively against the reform that caused these problems. If you’re against reform but promote Luigi then you don’t care about a single person who went into medical debt or died as a result of it.
Removed by mod
They’ve been censorious for over a decade. It’s just the old target was “acceptable” to most denizens of reddit and similar social media. Now that the censors are expanding their reach, we see umbrage? Come on now.
For better or worse, this seems to be way less of a problem on the Fediverse. I can’t tell if it’s because it’s federated OR if it’s because corporate America hasn’t woken up to it (yet?!?). I find way more interesting discussions on lemmy than anywhere else on the net. Hopefully it stays that way!
Doom scrolling is facilitated by ad-optimised algorithms that push low-nuance, emotive content that gets a reaction, for views. (Thinking particularly of twitter and Facebook here)
The fediverse doesn’t have that, and has no reason to, because as soon as any provider starts pushing ads, people will switch servers. So I think it WILL stay that way.
Also, I think as a consequence of having less combatitive content up front, people are generally in a less heightened emotional state as a baseline, and are able to approach more nuanced content more thoughtfully.
I straight up hate that so many people are just now brushing up against the fact that everything is marketing. Everything is purposeful. Everything is sinister. Goddamn.
