Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7151617
Results 241 to 250 of 250

Thread: Twitter?

  1. #241
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    لندورا
    Posts
    2,713

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by you View Post
    I thought my gripe about the online responses to the Westminster attacks was clear.

    But I'll underscore my point by asking a question.

    What is the difference between a Hopkinsian hate-bait-for-clicks hot-take and the corresponding gnomic moralism of the lefty counterpart?
    there may be a core of ideological difference beneath the layers of drama, but

    Quote Originally Posted by you View Post
    Does either one serve much purpose other than promoting the user? No.
    agreed, self-promotion is the main purpose of these media though, in moments like the Westminster attack even if most people forbear commenting and reserve judgement, tastefully, that doesn't matter because there are always going to be people who can't resist/feel their voice should be heard. I mean i think i saw a hot take on weds afternoon from James Corden. But this self promotion is part of how celebrity - the storification of public figures - dominates the media and trumps actual relevance, even the loftiest of media, even academia (!trumps!).
    So if you want to sip of the cup of twitter (or dissensus) there is a certain amount of this acting up to be put up with.
    But actually it's worse than that, because aside from the dumb online self-promotion of bigmouths there are actual irl interests behind the cacophony. Those fixed repertoires have been prepared to such an extent that this vacuous commentariat must yearn for "atrocities", which they desperately need to create the opportunity to further their own agendas, even justify their existence - the security establishment, the terrorists, the channels, the commentators.
    Either you engage with that, hopefully at some conscious level, or i suppose you give it a rest. Giving it a bit of a rest was helpful for me, so i'm with you on that.

    Quote Originally Posted by you View Post
    As you can imagine - my feed was predominantly left-liberal journos and academics.

    I saw people hashtagging #Westminster with sunny photos of London, tweeting that London is the greatest city in the world and 'won't be beaten'. I saw established writers who appear on BBC posting much more than normal, threads and threads of glib solidarity and take downs of rightwing media with their Patreon linked in their profile... And I felt that the only people this served was them. It was a one big self-promoting circle-jerk - under the guise of outrage or noble moralism.

    Of course, I agreed with the sentiments of most of my feed - of course I do... I did before they tweeted. Because of, as you rightly highlight, the bubble syndrome. So I felt the only good to come of it was for those social-entrepreneurs. Even the vague and pithy excuse of much of the left - 'consciousness' or 'awareness' is not valid here - because what awareness is there to spread/raise in people who already agreed and would feel the same anyway. Dialogue is not a decent retort either- precisely because of the nature of these platforms. We can't have a nuanced dialogue on a forum - let alone in 140 character dumps off a smartphone.

    I also see wannabe climbers replying in the heat of such hot-topics to other more established media jackals of the noise-pack - shite like #Solidarity to accounts of racism or sexism. Isn't this the parrotting echo-chamber of a vacuous 21st C 'right-on' cacophony?

    It just really depressed me and angered me - and rather than feed the rabble and become complicit I retreated. I dislike retreat or such Ostrichy responses to social problems but this once, coupled with my anxiety over compulsive behaviours being exploited, I pulled the plug.
    I really couldn't agree more, i found myself consciously distancing myself from the news cycle on wednesday evening.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to sufi For This Useful Post:

    you

  3. #242

    Default

    Yup... we're on pretty much the same page. As is to be expected online. 'Dissensus'... ;-)

    I do appreciate the interaction though. And you've mentioned some facets of the issue I hadn't really considered - cheers.

    There are other personal reasons for my withdrawal - but Wednesday was the proverbial straw.

  4. #243
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    لندورا
    Posts
    2,713

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by you View Post
    Wednesday was the proverbial straw.
    TRIGGER WARNING -> this link (from HuffPo Entertainment section) contains a shocking list of fatuous celebrities tweeting last Wednesday ... http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...b0b22b0d19d99c
    words fail...

  5. #244

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sufi View Post
    TRIGGER WARNING -> this link (from HuffPo Entertainment section) contains a shocking list of fatuous celebrities tweeting last Wednesday ... http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...b0b22b0d19d99c
    words fail...
    ... ugh, another one of my pet hates is the Trigger Warning tide...

    Yes, these schlebs know how to work don't they... Emoji's and #Westminster tags. Good work.

    Of course, I dislike this 'stand together' reactionary collectivism - locking tweeded arms together wearing sodden flat caps on the rain lashed brink - shit. But that is to be expected from these hate-bait purveyors... but the style that irked me most on Wednesday was the measured voice of reason call backs. Lily Allen's smug call for people to 'Calm Down' is just as bad as the 'STOP SENSATIONALIZING' moral-concern-for-RT trick.

    Good riddance. Happy I left.

  6. #245
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    47

    Default

    the horror.


    but really, did anyone expect any better? corden is a fucking whore.

  7. #246
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    15,044

    Default

    Hey, remember when Justin Bieber visited the Anne Frank museum and left a comment in the visitor book saying he hoped she would have been a "belieber"? I think he wins at atrocity-attention-whoring, lol.
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  8. #247
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    756

    Default

    I only use twitter to check occ on a few musicians. After all, why invest time and emotional attachment in something which is basically set up to promote the tweeter and sell the follower to online advertisers. To me how a big number of users uses twitter seems very misguided - as if they record some banality-talk in pubs or cafes and put it out there on twitter. Also problematic, and as stated in some of the above posts, are the bubbles that this and similar services push you.

  9. #248
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    لندورا
    Posts
    2,713

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by you View Post
    ... ugh, another one of my pet hates is the Trigger Warning tide...
    Yes sorry, it was aimed at you since you're fed up with all that nonsense, but slathered in irony. Hopefully you resisted the urge to cllick thru
    Arenít trigger warnings just a way to attract more views anyway, like when the announcer on tv says "this programme contains scenes of gratuitous violence and wanton nudity from the outset"?
    Quote Originally Posted by firefinga View Post
    I only use twitter to check occ on a few musicians. After all, why invest time and emotional attachment in something which is basically set up to promote the tweeter and sell the follower to online advertisers. To me how a big number of users uses twitter seems very misguided - as if they record some banality-talk in pubs or cafes and put it out there on twitter. Also problematic, and as stated in some of the above posts, are the bubbles that this and similar services push you.
    well yes obvs but there are lots of people who do have interesting stuff to say that doesnít make it into the msm - i curate my feed gently and find it reliably comes up with links to useful/interesting stuff. i also like the direct access to tweeters, so you can tweak piers morgan's virtual nose very directly if you feel the need, the unfilteredness cuts both ways.

    Is it interesting to consider what might happen if these celebs actually did something instead of just tweeting - does their perceived status give them influence in the real world, and does twitter/online waste that potential?

  10. #249
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sufi View Post
    i also like the direct access to tweeters, so you can tweak piers morgan's virtual nose very directly if you feel the need, the unfilteredness cuts both ways.

    Is it interesting to consider what might happen if these celebs actually did something instead of just tweeting - does their perceived status give them influence in the real world, and does twitter/online waste that potential?
    I have to sadly admit out of morbid curiosity I occasionally check assorted celebrities' tweets - just to regret that move soon

    As to the latter part of your post, I think tweeting is considered the main form of existance in some odd way. How influential people are via Twitter? Hard to say, my bet is: not very much probably.

  11. #250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sufi View Post
    Yes sorry, it was aimed at you since you're fed up with all that nonsense, but slathered in irony. Hopefully you resisted the urge to click thru
    Arenít trigger warnings just a way to attract more views anyway, like when the announcer on tv says "this programme contains scenes of gratuitous violence and wanton nudity from the outset"?
    Yes, cynically I expect if Trigger Warnings are used on Twitter it is for precisely that reason = clicks-via-reverse psychology. Perhaps a more deft version of the ubiquitous and direct 'WAIT TILL YOU SEE' or 'YOU WON'T BELIEVE'...

    But I don't agree with Trigger Warnings in any guise. Because who is to say what is triggering and what isn't? Declaring violent or sexual content is fine because it doesn't assume what people find upsetting - but Trigger warnings shift the onus on to the content sharer - putting them in the absurd positions of having to guess in advance what upsets people - which is, of course impossible - you may as well assume anything could be triggering. I imagine cigars are triggering for Hilary and Bill.

    Been a bunch of issues about Trigger Warnings on US campuses. I've had personal experience of (a complaint against me) this in the UK. It is cultural conservatism masquerading as aggressive liberal sensitivity.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •