Bigger Brother.

[Audley Strange]

No I'm not going to harp on about Orwell.

What I was really wondering was this. Have we turned the internet into a real time interactive reality show in which we all gleefully take part, perhaps unwittingly?

Let me get right to it. This latest Skepchick thing has been most amusing everyone's got heated and shouted at each other, the word rape has been used and suddenly it's like someone's turned on a siren and some stroboscopes and thrown a massive bag of speed and some machetes in the room. It's a hoot, certainly
but seriously, what is it? What's been achieved other than more negativity and more money for ISP's and advertisers?

It happens all the time. Flame wars, You tube wars, those Stygian comments sections. It's all antagonism as entertainment, shit people like the Goons and Lulzsec and the like exist to antagonise, so do trolls.

Why? What does it say about us? Is this level of debate really the best use of the internet? Are not most of us flies upon this web the ones who scoff at people watching "The Cowell Factor" and "Big Brother?" and the rest of these Conflict T.V. shows?

Let's face it we ALL love a bit of the drama, even those who say they don't and we should all calm down. I read somewhere recently the quote (my apologies for misquote or lack of attribution) that went something along the lines of "gamers used to be intellectuals pretending to be racists but ended up being racists pretending to be intellectuals"

I think that is unfair as an accusation but the mechanic of the thought, I think applies. In battling with arseholes we are ourselves becoming if not already, just as much a set of arseholes.

Especially you. Yeah you.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It's like having a cocktail party in a library where people work and wank a lot. That's all.

[maiforpeace]

No I'm not going to harp on about Orwell.

What I was really wondering was this. Have we turned the internet into a real time interactive reality show in which we all gleefully take part, perhaps unwittingly?

Let me get right to it. This latest Skepchick thing has been most amusing everyone's got heated and shouted at each other, the word rape has been used and suddenly it's like someone's turned on a siren and some stroboscopes and thrown a massive bag of speed and some machetes in the room. It's a hoot, certainly
but seriously, what is it? What's been achieved other than more negativity and more money for ISP's and advertisers?

It happens all the time. Flame wars, You tube wars, those Stygian comments sections. It's all antagonism as entertainment, shit people like the Goons and Lulzsec and the like exist to antagonise, so do trolls.

Why? What does it say about us? Is this level of debate really the best use of the internet? Are not most of us flies upon this web the ones who scoff at people watching "The Cowell Factor" and "Big Brother?" and the rest of these Conflict T.V. shows?

Let's face it we ALL love a bit of the drama, even those who say they don't and we should all calm down. I read somewhere recently the quote (my apologies for misquote or lack of attribution) that went something along the lines of "gamers used to be intellectuals pretending to be racists but ended up being racists pretending to be intellectuals"

I think that is unfair as an accusation but the mechanic of the thought, I think applies. In battling with arseholes we are ourselves becoming if not already, just as much a set of arseholes.

Especially you. Yeah you.

So I shouldn't be embarrassed about watching The Bachelorette anymore?

I'm still trying to take this all in. I was in that thread on Friday and there wasn't much going on other than me being attacked for not having a sense of humor, and all of a sudden the wrath of the internet was upon us from one tiny, two second post PZ made on his blog. It's not like we don't have controversial threads going on here already with the racist and libertarians we have here.

PZ abused his celebrity and used us for his own purposes. It's that simple. If he really cared about the Skepchicks he would have joined our discussions about them long ago.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Mai, it's just that his fans have gotten into the habit of stampeding every time he moos.

[maiforpeace]

Yea, see my edit. I have to be honest, I'm ashamed to have him as a spokesperson for atheism now. He raped me.

EDIT (figuratively, that is - geez, are we going to have to put disclaimers on all this shit now? )

[Audley Strange]

No Mai, you shouldn't, if the Bachelorette is the same kind of heated noise. The crux of my point in fact, we are no better. In fact we are worse because we think we're better yet do it for shits and giggles rather than a shiny prize at the end of it.

(As an aside because I'd really rather the thread be about the wider issue, I don't think anyone has to find any joke funny, but not finding something funny because it might hurt someone's feelings gives no one the right to forbid such jokes.)

[maiforpeace]

No Mai, you shouldn't, if the Bachelorette is the same kind of heated noise. The crux of my point in fact, we are no better. In fact we are worse because we think we're better yet do it for shits and giggles rather than a shiny prize at the end of it.

For many I think it's more than shits and giggles though. I think it's a way for them to express frustration, anger and despair over things they don't have control over in their own lives. Especially being listened to, and feeling important.

[Audley Strange]

Perhaps, but the very act of logging on itself is deeply alienating. I mean, perhaps it's just me, but sometimes when I'm writing a post essentially I'm reduced to ego and the perceptions of symbols on a screen and the vague noise of keyboard. The physical aspect is missing, not just the tactile, but a whole range of other cues and hints that allow us to be human, rather than just ego's venting.

I don't even know if I'm explaining that well. It just seems to me that while it is utterly dismissive to just say "well it's just the internets" it is equally wrong to consider it a social sphere. It's new still, but it seems to me there is something we are not actually considering. I don't mean to come across all Internet McLuhan, especially as I'm uncertain as to this, but it seems to me that it is the very opposite of a social experience, it is authoritarian and dictatorial by it's nature.

As I'm typing this I am aware of the irony, so no need to point it out but honestly, what the fuck is wrong with our egos that we have such arrogance to assume that our opinions matter so much that we must display them to random strangers and confront those who don't agree? Is it not akin to those annoying bible cunts doing it on the street?

Why do we do it? A willingness to understand? To compromise? Well occassionally yes, I've had my own mind changed on things, but mostly, well isn't it just... "Hey shut up and listen to me for a moment? VALIDATE ME!!!"

Can we do it better? I don't know. I'm genuinely curious as to whether the limitations of the medium itself as a useful communication tool is what causes all the hostility or whether what we have invented is essentially a mental toilet which we do cathartic shits into while wading in the collected psychic excrement of others.

[maiforpeace]

Audley, I totally get what your saying.

I'm going to respond in depth later because I find this subject intriguing and interesting, especially in light of the fact that unlike any other internet community I've been in, Rationalia has done it differently by actually making personal contact and developing a real life community at large.

But I'm a little tired right now (I tried, but the words are escaping me) so I'll get back to this.

[Pappa]

Audley, your post made me chuckle greatly.

Personally I think it's just "normal" human social interaction but the medium exaggerates much of it. Partly because of the huge number people involved. Partly because of the speed of communication (which prompts us to be less critical in our responses). I'm sure quite a lot of it is to do with the anonymity too, which can lead us to be less guarded.

[Audley Strange]

Well certainly The Greater Internet Fuckwad theory seems accurate to an extent, but your point about exaggeration is a fantastic one, because it doesn't, it literally does the opposite, it makes everything neutral, tone and implication free. What seems to be interesting is, what I and others have noticed and been saying is that there seems to be a staggering amount of inference made by people, more often than not leading to strawmen, errors and what seems to be deliberately provocative misunderstanding, but it is projection and to be frank it worries me because it means we are not even communicating, we are simply choosing how to react to neutral symbols and them blaming the author for our reactions.

It's comedy. It is the point of every Laurel and Hardy movie. Ollie thinks he is smart, Ollie fucks up, Ollie blames Stan. "That's a nice mess you've gotten me into!" But we're all so deadly serious about it that Semioticists must be drooling about the research potential.

So yeah, we are exaggerating it ourselves, perhaps unconciously, perhaps out of bloody-mindedness, but my main point is, why the fuck do we dig it so much and pretend we're somehow higher brow? Because we're personally engaged or because we're deluding ourselves as to just how smart and cultured we'd like to think we are?

I mean it's really no better than playground shit yeah?

[Jason]

I don't write the way I speak in day to day life, that's for sure. If I spoke the way I write people would look at me like I have three heads instead of the way they usually look at me - as if I have two.

I think a lot of it has to do with the power of (relative) anonymity and how that frees us from our inhibitions, fears and general feelings of inadequacy. I think it makes people feel emancipated to communicate and express their thoughts on a level they would like to but cannot bring themselves to do in real life. What level that is depends on the person.

The 'thrill' of being in the spotlight of a public arena, knowing there are hundreds or thousands of people 'watching' and being free to act as you like is addictive. I know it was for me back in the day when I was doing that sort of thing. I suspect that's what these sorts of people who throw themselves into popular conflicts and dramas are seeking - the 'thrill'. Whether it is because they feel good about themselves by being on the 'right', 'good', or 'popular' side or because they get a kick out of acting out against the 'good', 'right', or 'popular' side doesn't make much difference. They do it for the 'thrill' and the 'thrill' is better the more people are 'watching'.

Some people go beyond just adopting another level of communication and adopt an entire persona. For these people the whole of their internet activity has become one giant roleplaying game. They operate under the same principle as people who lower or raise their level of communication, but they've taken it much farther. They develop and flesh out their persona like a writer would do for a character in a novel.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that, yes the internet is largely about teh dramaz, and we like it (the internet, not always the drama) or we wouldn't log on, but the reason it is 'higher brow' than watching reality TV is that we're each in our own driver's seat. We're not inactively glued to our monitors waiting for the participants to make their next move - we're part of it. Teh internet dramaz is an interactive simulation.

ETA: simulation of human interaction - not to say it doesn't involve real people or it can't have real world consequences

[pErvinalia]

I think you are right, Audley (miss you at ratskep, by the way). The internet has predictably become an extension of the traditional media/entertainment industry (based on the same conditioned foibles humans now show). But the one critical difference between old mediums and the internet is that good stuff doesn't by necessity have to be crowded out by the lunacy/lulz/dramaz. The internet is essentially an infinite space, and the user is in control of the timing and quality/quantity of content delivery. This makes it a much more open and exciting prospect for stuff (sorry, couldn't think of an appropriate word).

[Gawdzilla Sama]

We were remarking at the Train Wreck that posting in a forum allowed a person to say things more carefully, when they take the time, than casual conversation. It's a high-speed version of the letter writing that went on before the telegraph came along. Days, weeks, months or even years went by between letters, and this time allowed the person to deliver a concise and thought out reply. Chat is the opposite of this, you are typing a reply and see the other person is already posting again. The Red Queen's race as it were.

[pErvinalia]

Perhaps, but the very act of logging on itself is deeply alienating. I mean, perhaps it's just me, but sometimes when I'm writing a post essentially I'm reduced to ego and the perceptions of symbols on a screen and the vague noise of keyboard. The physical aspect is missing, not just the tactile, but a whole range of other cues and hints that allow us to be human, rather than just ego's venting.

I've got to admit, that online "debating" for me is a real dissociative process. When I'm fully in the moment, so to speak, I am no longer debating with a human. I'm debating with a concept or an idea. Hence, I can be a total cunt when debating (even against my friends), but the next day just be totally normal again. I can really be ruthless and horrible towards the electrons (i.e. the ideas that are presenting themselves at me in the screen in front), but in reality I am actually being ruthless and terrible to real people. I've often apologised at varying calm times for my aggression in the active times. I think my friends kind of understand this now, but there's plenty of random strangers on the net who have copped it from me too. I don't know whether this is necessarily right or wrong, it just "is". In a way I think it can aid honesty and rationality, in that you aren't held back by emotional sentiments. But then, it can also lead to a total breakdown of civility. Seeing Gawdzilla here reminds me of the fight we had a ratskep. That was one of those moments with me. I wasn't arguing against a person, just electrons/ideas in the moment. I've got nothing against Gawdzilla and in fact usually agree with most of his views, and laugh heartily at his antics. It's just one of those things, I guess.

I don't even know if I'm explaining that well. It just seems to me that while it is utterly dismissive to just say "well it's just the internets" it is equally wrong to consider it a social sphere. It's new still, but it seems to me there is something we are not actually considering. I don't mean to come across all Internet McLuhan, especially as I'm uncertain as to this, but it seems to me that it is the very opposite of a social experience, it is authoritarian and dictatorial by it's nature.

Yeah. There's certainly that element across the internet. Hang out on Tumblr for a day and you'll see it in spades. But I think RS and particularly Ratz are pretty good in that regard. Except the RS theist/creationist forums where it's thoroughly authoritarian and condescending (not that I think it's unwarranted, in a lot of occasions; it's just a bit cringy to watch sometimes).

As I'm typing this I am aware of the irony, so no need to point it out but honestly, what the fuck is wrong with our egos that we have such arrogance to assume that our opinions matter so much that we must display them to random strangers and confront those who don't agree? Is it not akin to those annoying bible cunts doing it on the street?

Possibly. But I'm right, so it's different. :p

Actually, in a way, i'm only half joking. This is obviously not the case for a lot of (most?) people on the internet, but in my case I do this mainly as political and social activism now. So my goal IS to stuff my opinions down certain others' throats, and attempt to educate others. It's also to attempt to destroy certain counter arguments by pretty much whatever means possible (i.e. even totally empty rhetoric if necessary). I know this is slightly hyperbolic, but I view it as a war, and I want my side to win however possible. But I understand this isn't a majority activity on the internet. I think, as you mention below, there probably is some element of 'validation' in shouting on the internet.