|
OP you're right and the toxicity of online posting is getting to be so well-known that even academics are talking about it.quote:Though prior studies have analyzed the textual characteristics of online comments about politics, less is known about how selection into commenting behavior and exposure to other people’s comments changes the tone and content of political discourse. This article makes three contributions. First, we show that frequent commenters on Facebook are more likely to be interested in politics, to have more polarized opinions, and to use toxic language in comments in an elicitation task. Second, we find that people who comment on articles in the real world use more toxic language on average than the public as a whole; levels of toxicity in comments scraped from media outlet Facebook pages greatly exceed what is observed in comments we elicit on the same articles from a nationally representative sample. Finally, we demonstrate experimentally that exposure to toxic language in comments increases the toxicity of subsequent comments. Seems like in a lot of environments the more you post the worse you feel, and the worse you feel the more you want to take it out on others. It's a toxicity feedback loop that makes everyone involved unhappy.
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2021 04:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 23:29 |
|
|
dead gay comedy forums posted:what sort of loving gently caress BULLSHIT POST is this on CEE-SPAM by a purported MODERATOR}!?!?!?!?!?! FUKC YUO ALTIDORE IS A poo poo STRIKER he is indeed a poo poo striker
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2021 14:33
|
|
|
Lib and let die posted:OP there's actually some merit to the idea that the transmission method or medium of information is just as powerful, if not more powerful than, the message being transmitted via that medium. In the 1960's, Canadian Media Professor Marshall McLuhan proposed in his book Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man that the media itself, not the content itself is more influential on a society than any message it carries. He would also classify mediums as "hot" or "cold" mediums, based on whether some receiver engagement was expected or not. Other forums will laud the Shannon-Weaver model as an unassailable bastion of media analysis, but McLuhan saw that model as being tied to a necessary notion of efficient causality that was largely undone when the definition of efficient causality it is based upon was revealed to have been due to an early print-era mistranslation of Aristotle's idea of efficient causality. This is an interesting way to look at it, and there's one particular place where I think it's worth probing the difference not just between "the internet" and other forms of media, but within internet communication types. In particular, comparing a forum like this one to "social media". Of course you can see an oldschool web 1.0 internet forum like this as a form of social media. It's a medium where we're social with each other. But it departs from "social media" as we think of it today (facebook, twitter, tiktok, instagram, etc.) in a few clear ways, not least of which is that there's no behind-the-scenes prioritization of anything other than maybe recency, i.e., the default view for a forum on SA is to see stickied threads first and then threads sorted by most recent post. A thread with a million replies will get shunted below a thread with one reply if that one reply was made more recently, there's no algorithm sorting which threads you see and saying "this one with a million replies is clearly driving more engagement with the site so I'll push it to the top", it's just sorting by last post. This remains one of my favourite things about SA, it's set up for people to interact with each other and not for people to game an algorithm to get their things prioritized. There's no like or +/- post rating system other than rating threads which doesn't do anything unless you're a deeply strange person who reads the forum sorted by thread rating, and so there's nothing for the forum to prioritize except what the users themselves prioritize by posting a lot. There's a real contrast with the engagement-driven radicalization engine of something like facebook or twitter or youtube that recognizes what drives greater engagement regardless of its content and pushes it towards more people to make it more popular so that people will spend more time on the site. Or, put another way, we radicalize ourselves here instead of letting a computer do it for us.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2021 20:48
|
|
|
Lib and let die posted:I wrote A Lot of Words about this idea after all the AOC Met Gala stuff, when she tweeted out this statement. It's buried in the succ thread somewhere and I may go back and refine it, but she didn't do the idea justice, and really sort of perverted McLuhan's theories to shield herself from criticism. Absolutely. Even just using my very simple example of thread order in a subforum, ahead of the "last posted" sort order there are stickied threads, which got there because somebody with the power to stick threads went in and used it rather than because a computer determined that those were the best threads to have at the top of the forum.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2021 22:00
|
|