How one tweet can ruin your life | Jon Ronson

I'm reminded of this TED talk in these scenarios, by a journalist and author who interviewed many people who have been publicly shamed: ▶ this video

Yep; to say nothing of the psychological effects of being told that the whole world hates you. That sounds really traumatic. I'm not generally a contrapoints fan, but I really enjoyed the video she made about her experience with this on twitter: link Or the TED talk "How one tweet can ruin your life" from 2015: ▶ this video We studied To Kill a Mockingbird and The Crucible when I was in highschool. I remember thinking how barbaric and despicable "mob justice" was. I didn't understand it, and I assumed I never would - I thought it was something we reference from history. But twitter really has brought the mob justice style witch hunts back. I don't understand how anyone can claim its not a real phenomenon. Being cancelled is obviously quite a real experience for the people it happens to.

A relevant TED Talk I always think of when reading about these stories: ▶ this video Which makes me think: who are these people with enough time of their hands to be morality warriors on internet? Also who are these _friends_ who jumps on conclusion without allowing for a defense? I shouldn't be difficult, in this digitalized world, to provide solid proof of wrongdoing. I may not be the most aware of social cues, or maybe it's a cultural thing, but some of these people seems like absolute sociopaths.

I would hope that all agree a violent crime is worse than a racist tweet. However, there is a sentiment of sympathy afforded to murderers (that they're somehow deserving of rehabilitation) which is not always extended to those who have tweeted racist things. Perhaps this comes because a murder can be seen as a sad result of circumstances. Perhaps the criminal only had to murder because they had a bad upbringing and needed the cash and it was a horrible mistake. On the other hand, people perceived as racist are permanently marked as being ideologically dangerous. Mainly, I think this comes because racist tweeters can be seen as more directly responsible for their actions than a murderer. Of course, this line of reasoning is nonsense, but it appears to be quite common. Jon Ronson has a great TED talk about this, titled "How one tweet can ruin your life": ▶ this video . I would recommend that the grandparent post watch this.

Great TED talk on the original twitter kerfuffle referenced in the article: ▶ this video 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.) link

> I don't want to live in a world without American freedom of speech - where we can't be blunt and speak our minds. I take issue with this. I'm not hugely adept at history but from my understanding there has never been a time where you can just blurt out a communication and have it be "accepted" by society - this seems to me very American and appears very detached from reality and real world experience. Yes, you are accountable for the communications you make, whether via keybord, orally, or any other way. Yes, you can be killed for the communications you make - this is not new, neither shocking and has been a staple of humanity from the beginning. Yes, you will be cancelled if your joke is taken out of context, or if some journalist finds a tweet and somebody is on an airplane and at the center of a multi-national storm [0]. Textareas like the one you typed in to make your comment give you a lot of freedom, but also a lot of power, and humans are learning with great power wields responsibility. People will take offense at your crass jokes and delete you for it, perhaps it's best to step away and not click "reply" afterall. Your conversation with a friend may be recorded or overheard, perhaps somebody is stalking you and waiting for a golden opportunity to "get" you, perhaps it's possible to form a narrative the media can use that's pieced together just to convince a group then let it spread like wildfire. None of these things are new to humanity, and sometimes there's just n

Also sadly, some of those same companies seem to be enabling this shaming culture. (Twitter banning random users for just using the LearnToCode hashtag, while not banning journalists who called for the doxxing and harassment of a minor. Also: ▶ this video )

Company towns were a bizarre (and, arguably, pathological) special case in American history. Social media in the late 20-teens were a bizarre (and, arguably, pathological) special case in world history. ▶ this video

The thing about mechanics like upvotes/downvotes, is that they're ripe for exploitation by evil/sociopathic people. (For virality. Often for outrage-driven virality.) That's okay on a place like reddit, because things are largely pseudonymous, and if things go south, you can go to a different place or just take a break or even get a new username. Your real life network of friends and family isn't so easily abandoned or replaced. Not so sure what the difference is with Twitter, but maybe it's one of granularity. There are no boundaries there, so people have to police things themselves with block lists, or appeal to Twitter itself to get people banned. It's also clearly ripe for exploitation by sociopaths. link ▶ this video (What of HN? HN is moderated.)

From the article: Two key identifying marks of dystopia are social regimentation and an inevitable totalitarianism. "Conform or be cast out." --Rush, Subdivisions, Signals, 1982 "Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences." From the article: Next, dystopia is marked by dehumanization How one tweet can ruin your life | Jon Ronson -- ▶ this video From the article: The abuse of technology is another characteristic of dystopia. Google. Facebook. From the article: Next, dystopia empowers a new class of rulers and uses propaganda and state terror to maintain the power of the regime...The ultimate result of dystopia can be seen in the tragedy of an individual. Instead of only relying on state terror, there is a new brand of current day authoritarianism which is trying to use non-state power through media, social media, and non-governmental civic groups. The new twist is to erode freedom of speech, but not have it be technically illegal, because the government isn't doing it. The new twist is to erode due process and presumption of innocence, but it's not technically illegal, because trial by public opinion and media isn't a judicial process. The new twist is to disenfranchise people, but not in person, only online and in social media, because it's not "technically illegal." However, all of the above violates various principles of individual rights in spirit. To me, they are all dishonest means of having coercive, authoritarian effects on people at large, without being "tech

Historically a strongman is summoned as an excuse to end mob rule (real or imagined) resulting in an authoritarian government. Napoleon, Franco Mussolini are some examples. One also sees people jumping up with a banner in the front of the mob. Lenin and Kim-il Sung, for example. Of course the issues are real and need to be discussed and criticized. But fortunately stories like Evergreen State College are rare But the incidences of tenured professors who are no longer free to say what they actually think anymore are legion. And Twitter storms are not oppression, they are just people being wrong on the internet. Tell that to people whose lives have been ruined. ▶ this video So while events like Evergreen certainly need to be criticized, the more serious threat is that this is being systematically used by cynical parties in a dangerous way to portray a nation plagued by oppressive mobs who need to be put in line. Downtown Portland was tied up by such mobs as well. There have been hundreds of incidences of violence (a number closer to 1000 than zero) including assaults with serious injury. Why did tens of thousands of people surround a bunch of mostly normal, ordinary people, including a number of brown people, claiming they were "white supremacists" in Boston? The Left in general is plagued by the zeitgeist of an authoritarian, angry mob, and wordplay/splitting hairs about what exactly should be classified as "authoritarian" is simply silly when you've been actually mobbed. Thugs goi