![magic star](/img/share-magic.png?1753566981)
Fight!
![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1200,h_600,c_fill,f_jpg,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep,g_auto/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F424ba2f5-b2b5-4f38-8237-0a45171b1b5c_800x448.jpeg)
🌈 Abstract
The article discusses the current state of online discourse and the negative impacts of the incentive structures of social media platforms, which are fueling polarization, conspiracy theories, and a lack of empathy. It calls for individuals to take back control of their attention and choose to engage with more trustworthy communicators.
🙋 Q&A
[01] The Current State of Online Discourse
1. What are the key issues with the current state of online discourse described in the article?
- The online conversation is "awash with fevered conspiracy theories and degenerate grandstanding by an endless parade of digitally addled hucksters seeking to exploit tragedy for personal gain"
- The "loudest, most craven voices are winning a game that doles out rewards to those who will do whatever it takes to win attention, with no regard for truth or trust"
- Other platforms are "down-ranking news and politics, preferring suppression to whatever it would otherwise be loosed by their machines"
- The incentives of the current system "get stronger with polarization, feeding on conflict and histrionics"
- It has become "increasingly difficult to see each other's humanity" as political disagreements become increasingly extreme
2. How does the article characterize the current tone and tenor of online discourse?
- The article states that in the current system, "Biden isn't just bad—he's an evil globalist lizard person" and "Trump isn't just disgraceful—he's a democracy-destroying demon"
- It describes the discourse as being filled with "Democrats are despicable! Republicans are traitors! Hamilton gives you herpes!"
[02] Proposed Solutions
1. What does the article suggest individuals can do to improve the state of online discourse?
- "We can refuse to accept the system's rules and hold ourselves above them"
- "We can choose to spend our attention intentionally instead of endlessly scrolling for dopamine hits"
- "We can choose to reward the communicators we most trust with direct support"
- "You can slow down. You can take a breath. You can take back your mind."
2. Why does the article say this is not a problem that can be solved by political leaders alone?
- The article states that "to change the conversation—not just its contents, but also its tenor and tone—we need to change the incentives of a system that has ensnared us in its addiction feeds. But we don't need to rely on political leaders to do that. We can do it ourselves."
Shared by Daniel Chen ·
© 2024 NewMotor Inc.