Can You Watch This Without Getting Angry?

Great TED talk on the original twitter kerfuffle referenced in the article: [LINK] CGP Grey's take on how outrage is used to exploit us through social media: (Yes, I link this often, because the message is valuable.) [VIDEO]

Related, though less about brands, I really liked "This Video Will Make You Angry" by CGP Grey. [VIDEO] - Thoughts/memes as germs trying to reproduce and spread, battling for attention and thriving when people endlessly argue as part of an us/them dynamic.

I looked back at your story a couple of times but couldn't figure out how the outraged attacks are being rewarded. I do feel like you might be on to something in how critical comments are often the most discussed. Think about how the single like "thank you" or "thanks for that" comments are hidden as being empty of thought. I don't have any solutions but have you seen this CGP Grey video called "This video will make you angry" [VIDEO] which says that outraged ideas are the quickest to spread.

CGPGrey has a great description of this problem with his video "This video will make you angry": [VIDEO] The gist is that pithy, low-effort strawmans of an opposing tribe are highly attractive and contagious memes. I don't think it has anything specific to do with Twitter. You see similar issues everywhere: Facebook, Reddit, and of course meatspace. It's a human problem. Twitter and the short character-limit may magnify it a bit, I'll admit that. But the actual problem can't be solved on Twitter or Mastodon. Each individual needs to be aware of this human problem and to constantly make an effort to notice and counteract it in their own brain (which is very difficult and error prone). Perhaps if enough people start doing that more, then cultural change will take place. I don't know.

Oh I think it’s more about what’s being said than who is listening to who. For better or worse, human discourse is optimized for face to face interaction. It seems that widespread, anonymous speech turns even the most mild mannered individual into a raging maniac. On a similar note I recently watched this video: [VIDEO] and completely agree with its premise.

I don't like the turn this thread took, but weighing in here narrowly with something hopefully interesting... The memes themselves needn't be "adversaries" for it to be to the benefit of one of them to inspire rage against the other. "X makes people angry at people holding Y" can help X spread because people like talking about things they're mad about, and the presence of Y actually makes that more effective; the memes themselves are, to a degree, symbiotic within the broader society even as they maybe do bad things to the people in that society. For one particular perspective on this, I enjoyed [VIDEO] - relevant stuff starts around 3 minutes in.

As crazy as it sounds (by definition), there's a hypothesis that we get infected with viruses of the mind: [LINK] There's also a video explaining it in terms of funny cat video production: [VIDEO]

> When putting these media ecosystems to political purposes, various tools are useful. Humour is one. It spreads well; it also differentiates the in-group from the out-group; how you feel about the humour, especially if it is in questionable taste, binds you to one or the other. The best tool, though, is outrage. This is because it feeds on itself; the outrage of others with whom one feels fellowship encourages one’s own. This shared outrage reinforces the fellow feeling; a lack of appropriate outrage marks you out as not belonging. The reverse is also true. Going into the enemy camp and posting or tweeting things that cause them outrage—trolling, in other words—is a great way of getting attention. This reminds me of this CGP Grey video: [VIDEO]