The Internet's Age of Rage 315
RackNine sends this excerpt from an editorial at the Guardian:
"The worldwide web has made critics of us all. But with commenters able to hide behind a cloak of anonymity, the blog and chatroom have become forums for hatred and bile. ... The psychologists call it 'deindividuation.' It's what happens when social norms are withdrawn because identities are concealed. The classic deindividuation experiment concerned American children at Halloween. Trick-or-treaters were invited to take sweets left in the hall of a house on a table on which there was also a sum of money. When children arrived singly, and not wearing masks, only 8% of them stole any of the money. When they were in larger groups, with their identities concealed by fancy dress, that number rose to 80%. The combination of a faceless crowd and personal anonymity provoked individuals into breaking rules that under 'normal' circumstances they would not have considered. ... One simple antidote to this seems to rest in the very old-fashioned idea of standing by your good name. Adopt a pseudonym and you are not putting much of yourself on the line. Put your name to something and your words are freighted with responsibility."
Eternal September (Score:4, Interesting)
Body Language (Score:4, Interesting)
When we queue for a teller at the bank, there is a natural interaction between us that is completely non-verbal. We can see the woman who is stressed by an obnoxious child. We can see the fragile old man who needs extra time. On the Internet (and in traffic), these signals are not present. We often gauge each other's behaviour and responses in the context of our own lives and emotional state.
And this all occurs in the overarching context of our progressively deteriorating grasp on the English language. Smileys, and more recently Lol-speak, are an attempt to flesh out our inability to express our emotions in the written word. Lol-speak, or meme-speak is starting to help, but its had the whole of about 10 years to evolve - compared to a few hundred thousand years of the evolution of our non-verbal communication.
Is it any wonder that tolerance is lacking?
Thankfully, we're not completely stupid, and we're starting to adapt to the problem. Hence my personal favourite phrase on the Internet: Don't feed the trolls.
Re:Wow 20%? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Body Language (Score:5, Interesting)
'deindividualization' is actually 'REindividualization.' IE bypassing today's increasing pressures to conform, individuals are saying what they really think, and, according to this article anyway, that's a bad thing. I disagree completely. Feelings, consensus, and politeness should never outweigh rationality, truth, and objectivity. If they do, then we've lost the whole point of communications in the first place.
I grasp your concept about cues, but it's also supposed to be understood that those on the internet are unaware and (usually) don't care about any particular user's personal problems. The user is supposed to understand this by default. This isn't a rule I made up, it's just part of the deal. There just aren't any other cues other than the language used by the user and the peers he is communicating with. I remember a time when this was considered a good thing because irrelevant attributes were not used to judge.
Whose tolerance? If anything, the tolerance of the overly sensitive, emotional types that make up the majority of society is what's lacking. This was always true, but, like the anonymous users they whine about, systems like the internet allow them to hit critical groupthink mass as well, forcing their censorious expectations on ever growing amounts of communication between individuals. No matter what they say, their feelings do not justify censoring uncomfortable truth, which is the real reason they would like to stamp out anonymity whereever they find it.
Re:The obvious point that no one ever talks about (Score:4, Interesting)
Works in MeatWorld also... (Score:3, Interesting)
I've been biking to work for over 4 years now. About 3 months ago I attached a GoPro HD camera to my helmet to record my bike ride. It is very obvious on my helmet, impossible to miss if you see me on the bike.
Almost instantly I noticed a drop in car aggression towards me. And so far I've not had anymore "drivers get out of the car and threaten violence" situations. I decided on a camera for legal reasons. Police always told me whenever I reported something that it was my word against theirs. So I expected the camera to help with that. I was a bit surprised when a lot of the problems just stopped.
So anonymous behaviors extend into the real-world and are combatted in the same way. De-anonymousization...
--kev
Re:Wow 20%? (Score:3, Interesting)
What I've seen is that "most adults" have been indoctrinated with the idea that morals are an outdated tool used by society to control the weak-minded.
I don't think they've been indoctrinated. What you're describing is people rationalizing something that makes them feel bad about themselves. In a way the truth is worse than systemic indoctrination. It's systemic disillusionment.
When you're a kid, they tell you that you are special. Even if nobody can see what makes you special, we're taught to have faith that there is something inside you that is wonderful. Then you become an adult and very quickly it goes from "you are special" to "who the f**k do you think you are?" It's a dog-eat-dog world out there, because so many people are insecure because time is ticking away and their special-ness hasn't manifested itself. People are so desperate to keep up appearances they'll crawl all over other peoples' egos to do it.
Now me, I've been in situations where I've done the right thing even though nobody would know, but that's because I'm so egotistical I *still* think I'm special. I don't have proof of that, nor do I need it. My geek narcissism is sufficient to make me think of myself as wonderful. Now I suppose that by some standards I'm a fool for passing up on opportunities that "everybody" takes, but my way has its compensations. I don't have to worry that other people will find out I'm not as good as they think I am, because I'm too self-centered to care what other people think. But there is one person whose opinion matters a great deal to me. I'd hate to disappoint him, because he's in a position to know if I'm not up to scratch.
Re:Wow 20%? (Score:2, Interesting)
This is a very accurate statement. If you ask some people if something is right or wrong they will reply that it depends on the situation and other factors. The idea that things can be just plain wrong in all cases is seen by some in society as outmoded and not keeping up with the times. The funny thing is that is more leftist media people and leftist guests brought on to shows, not to mention leftist professors who haven't left their ivory towers in years to deal with the real public.
The problem with people thinking this is normal is in fact because it is not. The vast majority of Americans consider themselves religious. This idea that religion is something to scorn is only held by a few few vocal minority in the US. They scream the loudest so people think that is the way it is, but that is just an echo chamber and it doesn't reflect reality. The last Time poll on religion about two years ago showed that 60% of American's have been to some kind of church/synagogue/temple/whatever generally at least once every 2 weeks. The idea that the US is not religious is just a fantasy that a very few vocal are trying to push on everyone else to make it seem like that is the major, when in fact they just wish it was the majority because they are the minority. This very small minority wants everyone to think that religion is crazy and those who believe it are crazy. The problem is they are the minority and it is religion that is the basis for laws in almost every country and every society throughout history but that isn't something they want to talk about.
I think it is interesting that people like that demand that people be tolerant and everyone should be allowed to think whatever they want, when in fact it is they who are the least tolerant especially when it comes to religion. Science has become a religion to so many of these type of people that they are throwing rationality out the window and are willing to accept anything that might go against religion even when it isn't logical and there is no proof to support it and true hard science doesn't support what they believe.
I tend to think the most common reason, and this is my opinion, is because these people want to be able to do whatever they want without feeling bad about what they are doing or how it effects other people. They justify it by saying those who oppose them are idiots and need to join the modern age and that these people can't think for themselves. In reality what they are saying is I don't care about anyone but me and I should be able to do whatever I want even if it hurts someone else. No one likes to be told they are wrong and that what they are doing is wrong. It seems that these type of people have taken it to an extreme and not only don't want to hear it, but they want everyone else and society to never tell anyone they are wrong or bad. You only need to look at one of the most famous examples of how this lead to the destruction of a society. Look at the social arc of the Roman society and you will be very surprised how similar it is to current society, and how if we don't do something different to break the cycle we could end up exactly like the Romans.