On Sunday, June 26th, 2016, Tylenol shared a family photo of @2TravelDads and their sons. Here’s what the tweet looked like:
Despite the fact that thousands of people across the internet showed their support and love for LGBT families all over, they also received tons of messages and tweets calling them pedophiles and threatening to work to have their kids taken away.
Does the internet trolling this family has experienced count as bullying? In my opinion, it does, even though it differs from the bullying depicted by Boyd (2014). This type of bullying suffered by @2TravelDads does not only exist in the world of teenagers so it won’t outgrow, and also each of us can become the target. This type of bullying can happen whenever you voice your opinion on a controversial topic, particularly a political issue online. Now, the question is: What should we do when facing trollings/mean comments online?
Ideally, we and the people who hold different opinions can have an open discussion, and then we all can compromise and reach an agreement. However, according to my experience, this rarely happens online. More often, we see people arguing and attacking each other and end up with not changing the original opinions at all. Maybe I am a little pessimistic, but I always feel that the internet/social media might not be an ideal platform for people to have a productive discussion.
First of all, context is always lacking on the internet, but context is an important prerequisite for successful interaction. For example, when someone sees people in Hong Kong protesting peacefully, he might use “protesters” to refer to the people who participate in the protest. However, when someone sees “protesters” in Hong Kong sabotaging public facilities and beating people from Mainland China, he might use “rioters” to refer to them. Imagine that these two people post their opinions online, and they can hardly reach an agreement because they don’t know each other’s context.
Second, what we say is not just the words by themselves. What we say is the product of many things, such as our culture, language, life experience, education, social networks, etc. For example, it’s easier for people who live in the U.S. to understand the importance of non-binary pronounces than someone who has never met any LGBTQ people and lives in a country where these topics are taboos. It’s extremely hard to convince someone who has a disparate life trajectory from yours. Unfortunately, people online often have very different life trajectories.
Plus, some people online just want to dump their “trash” to you so it's a waste of time to argue with them.
Again, I might be a little pessimistic. I am looking forward to hearing the bright side of the story as well as your thoughts on the following questions:
- Do you think social media/internet is a good platform for people who hold different opinions to have a discussion/debate？
- What would you do when facing trolling/mean tweets?
- For me, I use social media mainly for finding like-minded people instead of convincing those who have different opinions. How about you?
Reference:
Boyd, D. (2015). It's complicated: the social lives of networked teens. Place of publication not identified: Yale University Press.
Thanks for bringing up this topic, Peizhu! Discussions/debates on social media is something that's often on my mind and the example you brought up definitely reflects the ambivalence I have over them as well. In response to your first question, I think the problems that tend to arise in these discussions aren't necessarily due to social media itself, but as we've talked about in other weeks, they're exacerbated through social media and they also have to do with who's participating in these conversations. With topics like racism, sexism, homophobia, etc., discussions certainly get heated not just on social media, but in real life too. I used to engage in these discussions on social media, but after a certain point, having to constantly justify my identity and talk about the ways I've been marginalized (often times traumatically) in society just burned me out both emotionally and physically. These days, I really just pick my battles, both in face-to-face conversations and on social media. I guess this relates to your third question too. It's not that I use social media to be surrounded by like-minded people, but I don't go out of my way to connect with people who have different opinions with me either. At the same time, I have to question - do the spaces I'm inhabit "in real life" (e.g. GSE, ICC, GASAM) direct me toward the like-minded people that I eventually add/friend/follow on social media in the first place? Shared interests bring people together (recalling affinity groups here), so are we all like-minded in some way or another?
ReplyDeleteThank you for this post Peizhu! I think the sense of relative anonymity people feel about online interactions makes them more likely to express negativity intensely, in ways they would reconsider if they were standing in front of the other person in real life. Additionally, I think it is becoming more and more the case that the intense escalation of disagreements online also seeps over into offline life and some of the offline civility we have/had for each other is diminishing. In quite an ironic twist, I think access to vast amounts of information online has somehow made it more likely for us to only interact with like minded people. Maybe it is the lack of civility I noted before or maybe it’s the algorithms, but it is very rare to find someone who goes out of their way to seek perspectival diversity. In order for productive interaction to take place online, we need more tools to help navigate online interactions. Would comment section guidelines be useful? Active moderators? We need to learn/relearn how to make arguments and not resort to mudslinging and personal attacks but the efforts of those trying to make arguments are usually drowned out by the circus.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your post and questions. To answer your first question, before analyzing the ‘medium’ of communication, I would start by looking at the participants. Somehow, I think that the Internet is a little bit like money, in that it amplifies who you are. If participants do not want to have productive conversations and are not open to different perspectives offline, I wouldn’t expect them to behave any different online. So, to me (and sorry for the wishy-washy answer) it comes down to the participants. It is them who can make social media a “productive” platform.
ReplyDeleteThe value that I attribute to social media is in the space it creates for sharing ideas, and seen the world from someone else’s perspective.
Isra
Peizhu, thank you for bringing up such a relevant example. It reminded me of this example where Cambell's soup also highlighted a guy couple: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/images/2015/11/Soup.jpg except that the company came back and defended their stance. I think it's a brave thing to do, especially at the risk of major backlash. It reminds me of the Gillette commercial from earlier this year that played around the Super Bowl https://www.gq.com/story/gillette-commercial-preposterous-backlash This commercial really rubbed some of my loved ones the wrong way and I was only able to talk about the reasons why with some of them.
ReplyDeleteIn thinking about the second question, my instinct is to try to understand the other person's point of view, even they are just trolling around. It feels like we don't really listen to each other much and are quick to judge. Sometimes though, it doesn't work and maybe the person's intention is to be confrontational. If that's the case, I just let it be. Admittedly though, if it's a comment that has really gotten under my skin, I will delete it. I do this because I don't want to keep thinking about it, especially if others respond to the comment.
Thanks again for some more great examples, Maria. The Gillette commercial is incredible--and I think these kinds of commercials are great ways to spark conversations in real life. What if this were discussed as part of a "bullying" curriculum?
DeleteThank you for your post, Peizhu. You brought up some important points about why online discussion/debates may not always lead to desirable outcomes. Regarding your first question, I think we have less sense of who they are talking to online (e.g. their geographic location, linguistic/cultural/socioeconomic background, and many other life conditions) unless on some type of not-so-anonymous online communities as this blog, thus it is hard for us to decide how much we can assume about our audience. That being said, if one is not aware of the need to contextualize their discourse and just goes on to talk as they would do in real life with their friends and family, it is very likely that their intention will be misinterpreted and result in some sort of aggression. One critical condition to a productive and meaningful debate, in my opinion, is to specifying the context and the realm of issues on the table. That's why I don't think online forums are the best place to have debates and discussions. But at the same time, not many people will even get to talk to people from such diverse backgrounds at all if it were not for those online forums.
ReplyDeleteRegarding your third question, I personally don't get involved in online debates unless I can identify the participants and the contexts that they come from to the discussion. In that sense, I recognize that the scope of people that I interact with and the issues that I confront online are pretty limited than those of some other people more actively involved. I have to admit that it's been completely for the peace of my mind, but I've recently started to feel like I should raise my voice to communicate with a wider range of people on what I've been learning and researching here in graduate school. I'm still figuring out how to best navigate the vast ocean of Internet by identifying the right community of people and engaging with them in a more meaningful way.
Thanks for sparking such a great thread, Peizhu. I can relate to your frustration with the inscrutable dynamics of "discussions" on social media. I find any on-line social media confrontation terrifying! But I do like to surf around on places like Reddit now and then just to get a taste of the kinds of ideas people are putting out there (and supporting!). I'm obsessed with reading comment sections on New York Times articles (okay, its own bubbble, I know). But sometimes even the comments on recipes get a little harsh! I also realize I am in my own bubble most of the time--shocked when I here certain opinions from my own family members, and parents, both of whom were "radical" college history professors. I like the idea of using those little moments of shock to push me to ask them open-ended questions (what exactly about Elizabeth Warren's platform do you find too radical?) or question their idea of a funny joke (ugh!)--but it's often hard to disagree with family members, and it's also hard to take a genuine inquiry stance. But, back to bullying, it seems to me that ignorance is the root of most bullying behavior, and sharing more of our points of view and talking about the distinctions between our words, turns of phrase, "funny jokes" and their meanings can do a lot to combat ignorance--a life long process...
ReplyDeleteThank you for your inspiring post, Peizhu! As you mentioned, some people on the internet just pretend to show they are more intellectual than you through disagreeing with what you said or arguing with you. To respond to your first question, in my opinion, it really depends on the types of online platform. Social media may not be a good platform for people to have productive discussions. Some people use social media to post informal thoughts and pictures about their life. Maybe they just want stuff there. If other users have different opinions and point out errors in the post, the blogger may feel offended and think "why make this fuss". Instead, there are platforms for people to share different opinions and build on constructive arguments. But these platforms are limited to some professional forums which require participants to have some background knowledge (such as scholars' blogs). I agree with you that the context is fundamental to have constructive and engaging conversations among participants. As for the second question, if a user posts several trolling tweets, I would question myself, "do I continue to follow". If the user leaves some trolling comments under my post, I just ignore it because I think this is my post and it is exhausting to argue with him/her. But if the comments are abusive, I would definitely report and then block it.
ReplyDeleteHi Peizhu,
ReplyDeleteThanks a lot for this post. I really feel for the family in the Tylenol tweet and wonder why there are some many people who are so ignorant and hateful to those that are slightly different from them. The internet seems to be a place where anonymity allows for people to get away saying whatever they want without being held accountable. It is also easy to dehumanize a person when you see them on a screen.
I don’t think you are cynical or pessimistic at all. I personally rarely find online “discussions” useful. Unless all parties are engaging in good faith, there are no ground rules or mediating forces. People argue across each other in the name of “freedom of speech”. I pride myself on being on having always been a silent observer. If I really support something or someone, I contribute with my attention, my affirmations (as in recommendations to people), and my wallet. I try to use social media to get new information and to follow real friends in real life.
I want to especially point out the Hong Kong example. Part of the reason why two different parties have different opinions is probably also affected by how they feel about a certain political issue. I am reminded of this news issue in American politics recently (two links, to provide different perspectives!):
https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/11/5/20943751/twitter-political-ads-ban-facebook-strategists-acronym-democrats-trump
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/02/opinion/facebook-zuckerberg-political-ads.html
Thanks for your sharing Peizhu! I think ideally internet is the place where people can share their ideas and perceptions without limitation and constraint. However, in realistic world, internet is never a place free of bullying and trolling. When people want to share their ideas, it is necessary to consider the possible problems that might consider. It might be true that internet give people some kind of freedom to share their life. However, the influences of sharing and comments on the internet can definitely throw impacts on people’s everyday life.
ReplyDeleteWhen encountering trolling tweets or comment on the social media, the negative feeling overwhelmed me in a minute. These negative feeling can last for several hours or days. Even though I do not know the person who gives me the mean comments and his/her idea can hardly physically influence my life. Nevertheless, these comments negatively influence me mentally. One single negative comment can destroy part of my day. And if I decide to argue with this person, I will be engaged in this meaningless dispute. Although I understand this disputed is completely meaningless, I cannot stop my from throwing negative comment back. After being influenced by several hours, I will probably decide to block this person forever. At that time, I already become calm.