Wise Before Viral: Dealing with the Social Media Drama

My hand automatically reaches out to the phone to check for cool new things to occupy my mindspace. It’s like a reflex action really. When you’re bored or awkward, go for the mobile. Devices have become such indispensable, we humans might actually evolve differently now on. We probably shouldn’t be surprised if future humans had a padding on their palms, or grew a pouch to carry devices, not quite unlike a kangaroo. A big reason on what makes them so important to us is clearly ‘social media’.

Social media is designed to bring people closer. So close that it begins to close your sphere of new ideas and opinions. It is also designed to engage people, not always enlighten them. Their algorithms decipher the kind of content you like, the kind of people and posts you engage with and promote the same to you. Basically, if you show interest in rubbish, rubbish is thrown back at you. Many opinions are far from stimulating, rather they make the nervous system nervous. With an increased number of young, vulnerable and previously internet-impervious population logging onto internet as a means to learn, search for opportunities, it is sad that these won’t be the only things they will be discovering.

Earlier in August, Facebook had said that it purged 22.5 million pieces of hate speech content and 1.5 billion fake accounts (out of 2.45 billion total accounts!), and this is in the second quarter alone. This is almost 2.5 times the same figure from Q2 last year.

You might think, ‘So what is the big deal? Granted there is fake news, rumors, conspiracy theories and wackos who promote them. Isn’t that just life?’.

No. It’s much worse. Let me explain.

There are two types of people on social media. One: those who initiate the trail of hate. These are the ones that either post or respond with objectionable content, inviting controversy. Two: The ones who are baited by the first kind. They respond to hate with equal fervour.

The concerning part is that social media provides a fertile ground for both these kinds of people. A fertile ground where weeds grow and spread faster than crops and it’s hard to tell the difference between both. (Did you know that fake news of Twitter spreads 6X faster on average than real news?) The concern is when social media legitimizes a culture of polarized views with a façade of individual self-expression and the right to free will.

Adding fuel to fire is the effective AI, which makes it impossible to get out of the blackhole of ‘similar’ and ‘recommended’ content, which might just be clever copies of the same sensational, fake or inflammatory content that you just happened to stumble upon.

This rabbit-holing is dangerous because of two things. One, due to “customization” of your feed, it might appear that the view you hold is the universal truth, cementing your confirmation bias. If you were mildly confused on how a mask can keep a killer virus at bay, by day 7, you will be convinced that wearing a mask is nothing but a conspiracy against lipstick companies. Second, the volume and the importance of such content would appear rather high. It might seem that the whole world is interested only in what Taimur ate for lunch, but in reality, only a fraction of people actually gives a hoot about Taimur’s burps. This is one of the biggest ironies of social media. You are promised the world, but you will end up living in the bubble. Damn it, Mark!

This bubble is the starting point. Any threat perceived by any means to this bubble is vehemently guarded. Us vs Them. If the presence of such content is one part of the problem, our reaction to that content is a different problem altogether.

Reading comments on a post is watching drama unfold, akin to reality TV. There is always someone who takes offence. Since when have we started worrying about an opinion of a single random person living somewhere on earth? If a John Doe endorses a flat earth, let him. Knowledge is power, but stupidity can be contagious. Maybe it’s not always essential to challenge a Facebook post. Maybe, just maybe, smart people do not promote their scientific proofs on Facebook or TikTok. Maybe the smart ones aren’t even on social media. A bunch of people aggressively disagreeing with each other in the comments section, with a couple of extreme or inappropriate comments are enough to make a sorry post go viral. This is the kind of viral fever you’d want to stay immune to.

On the extreme end, there are a section of people armed with nasty comments at the slightest provocation. The comments can range anything from mild sexism, undermining the other person, to threats, harassment and public humiliation. Few psychologists feel that those who feel the need to post such hurtful posts are probably compensating for their otherwise lack of importance or attention in real life. Internet gives these trolls a chance to be anonymous and hide behind a screen.

Why is it so easy for people to post on social media what they wouldn’t otherwise publicly admit or say to a person’s face?

Simple. The lack of consequence or accountability. They won’t come to know the victim’s feelings. Even in case something goes really south, social media has given us the option to edit and delete. Edit or delete, but the damage is not undone. They might even get away with it, through multiple fake accounts.

Who is to blame for all this?

Unlike viral posts, that always know who to blame, this is not a straightforward answer. Internet has always been a cool new toy with a choking hazard. Be it the top-line ambitions of commercial corporates, vested political interests of public representatives, religious propaganda of rabble rousers, or the general public looking to have fun, they all have made social media free from the regulation of traditional media. It is safe to assume that neither the social media companies nor the general public are going to be proactively requesting for regulatory watchdogs. Enforcing regulation has its own demerits, which will, ironically, be debated again on terms of freedom of speech. There is no silver lining to the cloud, just a downpour.

Then what do we do?

It is difficult to shun internet in its entirety and live an anti-digital life. A two step process will be a good first step: Tight-leash the content and unleash your rationale. This simply means filter for fake or extreme content and but be open to any rational point of view.

For the first step, terrorist, inflammatory, misanthropic or disturbing content are already being flagged and removed. It would help if they are source-tagged as well. Monitoring should be at its peak during periods of national and international importance, like the upcoming elections or the ongoing pandemic. Unfortunately, it is hard to have a granular level of content regulation right away, especially in video content formats, like Facebook or Tiktok. One, purely due to the bulk of data and two, because there is no objective measurement on what qualifies a content to be safe. So, we can only train ourselves to filter.

Filter does not mean selective absorption; it is merely fact checking the data. The ability to differentiate between fact, fiction, rumor or truth is a science. It is an attitude that is built by being inclusive to different ideas and opinions and questioning narrow-minded or extreme beliefs. An attitude built on values and objective truth.

Remember, the genius and the wise are always in doubt, while the fool claims to know-it-all. If you see someone taking offence when their stand is questioned, that is another indication. Comments that attack the person rather than argument (‘All Geminis are liars’), comments that use strong language (‘I am disgusted’), give emotional explanation to a logical argument (‘Period leaves are a way to discriminate the weaker sex) or are just downright inappropriate, need to be strictly rejected. And remember to fact-check as much as you can, from neutral, objective sources.

As I mentioned before, identifying the content is one step. The next step is how should we let it affect us. Post kindness. It is important to practice tolerance where it’s due and be open enough to different points of view. Being a cognitive miser in a globally connected world, where ample opportunity and knowledge are at fingertips is just incredibly foolish.

The two steps are not independent. The next time you see a post, image, meme, comment or any content on social media, ask yourself a question. Why am I uncomfortable with this content? Is it because it is derogatory to one or more sections of people? Is it a sensationalized version of otherwise passable information? Does it challenge your existing world view? There’s a good chance that years of conditioning, conscience and common sense might give you the answer. If not, brace yourself, we might be at the cusp of a generation that is too inward-looking, easily manipulated and fragile.