Friday, 17 January 2020

Manipulating Opinion or the Outrage Machine: Can it be Tamed?

I saw this theatlantic.com/magazine/ article  and put it aside because I was busy that day. Today I read it and highlighted it on my timeline for possible discussion because it is a hugely important issue.

The authors ask, " (W)hat would happen to American democracy if, one day in the early 21st century, a technology appeared that—over the course of a decade—changed several fundamental parameters of social and political life? What if this technology greatly increased the amount of “mutual animosity” and the speed at which outrage spread? Might we witness the political equivalent of buildings collapsing, birds falling from the sky, and the Earth moving closer to the sun?"

There is no question social media have changed the world, especially the part of it that is constantly connected to Facebook, Twitter, and the other big social media drivers of public opinion in the 21st century.

The authors  and reference the sociometer theory in this article by Leary which"reviews research evidence that supports three central predictions of the theory—that acceptance and rejection influence state self-esteem, state self-esteem relates to perceived social acceptance, and trait self-esteem reflects people's perceptions of their general acceptability or relational value."
They point out that "(s)ocial media, with its displays of likes, friends, followers, and retweets, has pulled our sociometers out of our private thoughts and posted them for all to see.'

We know from many disturbing studies this is particularly problematic for teens in terms of social media depression, vulnerability to cyberbullying, and a host of other issues young people have online.

However, a shocking "2017 study by William J. Brady and other researchers at NYU measured the reach of half a million tweets and found that each moral or emotional word used in a tweet increased its virality by 20 percent, on average."

The article goes on to provide a brief history of how Facebook and Twitter developed its functions, including, shares, retweets, and likes, which collectively has had the unintended (I hope) effect of substantially increasing the toxicity of the social media environment, causing "fake news" to flourish, and making outrage flourish,

The good news is there may be a way back. The authors point to three helpful approaches in particular:

"(1) Reduce the frequency and intensity of public performance. If social media creates incentives for moral grandstanding rather than authentic communication, then we should look for ways to reduce those incentives. One such approach already being evaluated by some platforms is “demetrication,” the process of obscuring like and share counts so that individual pieces of content can be evaluated on their own merit, and so that social-media users are not subject to continual, public popularity contests.

(I pointed out in my Facebook post this has already been done on Instagram for example.)

(2) Reduce the reach of unverified accounts. Bad actors—trolls, foreign agents, and domestic provocateurs—benefit the most from the current system, where anyone can create hundreds of fake accounts and use them to manipulate millions of people. Social media would immediately become far less toxic, and democracies less hackable, if the major platforms required basic identity verification before anyone could open an account—or at least an account type that allowed the owner to reach large audiences. (Posting itself could remain anonymous, and registration would need to be done in a way that protected the information of users who live in countries where the government might punish dissent. For example, verification could be done in collaboration with an independent nonprofit organization.)
(3) Reduce the contagiousness of low-quality information. Social media has become more toxic as friction has been removed. Adding some friction back in has been shown to improve the quality of content. For example, just after a user submits a comment, AI can identify text that’s similar to comments previously flagged as toxic and ask, “Are you sure you want to post this?”

I applaud all of these, but also wonder what our role as consumers of social media could be. Some of the things I have done and seen others suggest include:

1) Dieting - consuming far less social media if your tendency is to spend hours a day. Personally I find popping on briefly in the morning, popping back briefly in the afternoon, and maybe (or perhaps not, depending on the day) taking a quick look in the evening is far better than spending much of the day looking at my feeds, going into that daze of scrolling, scrolling, scrolling

2) Watch carefully - notice the source. If credibility seems off, check a fact-checker site to see if it is legitimate. Employ the maximum critical skills at one's disposal first rather than leaping to like or share.

3) Have more and better face time with family and friends - turning off the phone/computer/tablet when people are around as much as possible. 



Wednesday, 15 January 2020

"I Hope We Choose Love"

One thing you learn quickly as an activist, or really in any capacity politically, is that conflict between humans is unavoidable. Whenever you have two or more people, you will have different opinions. When you have large groups of people passionate about saving the world, many different opinions clash wildly.

This summer, I bought and read a new book by Kai Cheng Thom, recommended to me by my eldest daughter who is acquainted with Kai. It is called I Hope We Choose Love: A Trans Girl's Notes From the End of the World.
I highly recommend it, and you may purchase it here.


The context Kai writes within is the trans community, but many of the struggles and conflicts are familiar to those of us who are politically and socially active. She speaks of her early days in social/queer activism, how she wanted to be accepted and loved, but over time she and other activists have realized that there are issues that need to be addressed about the way we are with each other within activism. The very first chapter (or essay, as the book is really a collection of essays interspersed with poems around an over-arching set of themes) references a number of other books and articles within the social left that critique what has been happening with us.

She has a lot to say from personal experience and what she has lived in relationship with others about what she calls "increasing fragmentation and oversimplification of identity politics via the Oppression Olympics" (p. 21). Also false binaries and the politics of safety (p. 22), exhausting performance of virtue and exclusion (p. 23), bullying, call outs, mob mentality (p. 24)... Her analysis is fearless, thorough, and initially it feels overwhelming.

How could we possibly make our way out of this morass?

The central essay, called unsurprisingly "I hope we choose love", outlines a new and hopeful paradigm for those who would do the work of justice. First, she redefines justice through "an ethic of love" instead of the lens of punishment, and suggests we begin by creating "flexible, working, practical definitions of justice so that we understand what we are doing and what values we share". She reminds us survivors of harm can perpetrate harm and urges us to "invest deeply and fervently in the dignity of human life. (All in this paragraph from page 89.)

There is a tremendous amount to good advice in the rest of this essay so please read it if you can. I just want to close sharing about it with one more quote from the end of this essay: "We must love ourselves... Love for the community that has failed us all. We live in poison. The planet is dying. We can choose to consume each other, or we can choose love. Even in the midst of despair, there is always a choice. I hope we choose love."

I don't know about you, but I am very deeply moved by this. I am blessed to exist in a little activist bubble of beautiful, warm, and amazing people in Extinction Rebellion Hamilton, But over more than 2 decades of activism, I have experienced and seen an awful lot of conflict, calling out, exclusion, and human suffering.

I hope we choose love!

Monday, 13 January 2020

We Stand With Wet'suwet'en


Today we rally and march as Extinction Rebellion Hamilton in support of Wet'suwet'en.

For those of you who have not yet heard: Unist'ot'en Camp put out a call to everyone, including us settlers, to protest in solidarity: https://unistoten.camp/alleyesonwetsuweten/

This is a summary of the standoff between Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs and the government which is trying to drive a pipeline through unceded, that is unsurrendered, lands, over which they have no jurisdiction.

' if Indigenous activists and their allies succeed in thwarting the $6.6-billion Coastal GasLink pipeline, it could give momentum to those trying to stop the even more costly $9.3-billion Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.'

Amazing, right? But the pressure is enormous, and though there have been demonstrations all over Canadaprotesters have reason to fear police action.

Please support them if you can: http://unistoten.camp/support-us/

We have another problem with a pipeline right here in Hamilton.

Enbridge wants to build a fracked gas pipeline through the Beverley Swamp among other fragile ecosystems.

Get this: it is not even to benefit Ontario. They want to destroy our wetlands and raise our rates (let's face it, this won't be free, and guess who pays?) so they can sell more gas to the US.

Outraged? Sign this petition: http://chng.it/Y8j2VPtSny and talk to your MPP and your MP as well as your councillor about the fact that you want their help stopping it.

Hamilton 350 has been leading the charge against Enbridge. Check out their latest blog here: http://hamilton350.weebly.com/blog/demand-that-enbridges-proposal-face-a-full-hearing





Saturday, 11 January 2020

Climate Grief

This week, I attended a Climate Circle for the first time. Every 2nd Wednesdday of the month Hamilton 350 hosts one, and this past week it was held in the comfy room at the YWCA that SACHA has for meetings like this. A Climate Circle is a safe space for people struggling with the enormity of the #ClimateEmergency and there are even spaces online - see wehealforall.com/climate-circles for example.

It wasn't clear what to expect. It turned out to be a warm, welcoming experience whereby everyone was invited to share first about their day in dyads (you share without interruption for a couple of minutes while the other listens and then the other person shares while you listen), and then we took turns sharing for up to 5 minutes each. It is a very startling and healing experience to be listened to without judgment or commenting, if you are not used to it, and I could see that some were new to it. I always enjoy this dynamic but as I have been experiencing it every Sunday for an hour at a time for the past two years at Hamilton Meditation , it has become a more normal and comfortable space for me.

A little to my surprise, I spent the whole time I shared crying.

There is a lot to cry about. Over a billion animals have died in Australian wildfires in a shocking short timeWet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs must now plead with RCMP and politicians for fair treatment of their people who are resisting destruction of unceded land for the purposes of building a natural gas pipeline by Coastal GasLink. Though we are not sure exactly, we think 10,000 species go extinct each year.

If you're a climate activist with an organization like Extinction Rebellion Hamilton though, at the same time that you experience moments of sheer panic because of the #ClimateEmergency , every day you have hope as well, because you have people to plan concrete actions with who are as passionate about the climate as you are, and you feel like you can do your best in a difficult situation where we routinely ask if it is wrong to be hopeful about climate change.

So this is where I am this week. Feeling hopeful and passionate about what we are working on together, but also deeply sad. Both at the same time.

Holding space for each other whether we are up or down. Whether friends are arrested, freed, or receive rulings that all charges have been dropped. On good, bad, and indifferent days, walking each other home.

It has got me thinking about tears. More about that in another blog, but today I read this article about The Crying Book, and found it intriguing: the-crying-book-reveals-how-tears-can-help-us-and-how-they-cant.