Transcript for Podcast: "I Feel Snitty," Episode 116: "How to Survive a Twitter Mob," is now available!

Podcast: I Feel Snitty

Episode 116: How to Survive a Twitter Mob

Premiere Date: 2/25/21

Length: 8:47 (1,433 words)

Link: https://ifeelsnitty.podbean.com/e/how-to-survive-a-twitter-mob/

Transcript: 

Welcome to I Feel Snitty, episode 116, entitled, “How to Survive a Twitter Mob.” I’m your host, Craig Rozniecki.

 

Well, it finally happened. After all these years of tweeting, I was finally subjected to a Twitter-mob, not once, but twice over the course of the past couple of weeks.

 

I won’t bore you with all of the details. I’m not looking for sympathy here or anything. It was an interesting experience, though, I must say.

 

I admit it; there are times I enjoy playing devil’s advocate – especially in the social-media age. Even if I agree with a person’s opinion, if the opinion doesn’t feel well-researched or thought out, chances are I’ll ask them a question or two just to make them think and discover for themselves how strong their viewpoint really is. Let’s be real here – if a person’s opinion collapses upon being asked a single question, it seems pretty obvious the individual didn’t think much about the matter before concluding. So, at the end of the day, can they say with any degree of certainty they truly believe the opinion they’re spouting? I don’t think so.

 

This is why I don’t form opinions until I know truth is on my side. Until then, I remain agnostic. There’s a stark contrast between forming an opinion and seeking information to confirm it and forming an opinion based on information you’ve received. I go the latter route, because I’ll then know I firmly believe what I say I believe, and be able to handle any form of prosecution into the subject and my views on it.

 

Unfortunately, this practice – known as critical thinking – has become more obsolete than Beta tapes at Blockbuster. Patience is a foreign word to a growing number of people in the world – the U.S. in particular. Everything is seemingly condensed: Text messages, abbreviations, soundbites, YouTube clips, clickbait articles, etc. Hell, things have gotten so bad, I’m just waiting for the day when 60 Minutes is altered to 2 Tik Tok Videos and a Cialis Ad. We don’t have time for investigative journalism anymore; reading the complete results to scientific studies; watching an entire 30-minute interview; or reading an article which takes longer than it does to take care of business at a dive-bar urinal.

 

These trends are dangerous, as the January 6^th attack on our Capitol showcased. The problem is with abbreviated news, we tend to receive abbreviated truth. Context is pushed to the curb in favor of manipulation by way of emotional triggers. These abbreviated clips and triggers then get repeated, by multiple sources, and what we end up with is a host of angry people ready to figuratively (sometimes literally) destroy the individual or individuals at the heart of the story, even while lacking the full picture.

 

Unfortunately, in this abbreviated-patience-social-media age, middle ground or indecisiveness is typically not tolerated. The false-dilemma fallacy of “you’re either with us or against us” takes center stage, and if you so much as ask a question of an individual on one side or the other, they will then assume you’re on the other side. Yes, hyperpartisanship has reached such a point that it’s now viewed by many as partisan to showcase nonpartisanship. This trend cannot continue if we want to have a free and open society.

 

Through the First Amendment in the Constitution, we’re guaranteed the right to freedom of speech without governmental persecution. Twitter is a private company and has the right to ban any member it so chooses and the First Amendment in the Constitution still stands. Having said that, though, of what good does it do to cancel any and every which person who disagrees with us on a single issue, or so much as asks a question pertaining to it? Is that not a dangerous precedent to set for our country moving forward? Where did civilized discourse go? Why is it suddenly wrong to seek the full truth and not just an abbreviated truth to confirm our longstanding viewpoints? Do we not have the time to actually research before forming an opinion and think before expressing said opinion? Then, when said opinion is expressed, must people throw insults at the speaker, as opposed to inquiring why they feel the way they expressed and how they came to their conclusion?

 

During my two recent instances with Twitter-mobs, here were just a few of my observations:

 

- Most responders didn’t actually read my full message nor comprehend what was written.

- Many responders cherry-picked from my response to paint it in a shade which was far removed from the one I used.

- While there were a handful of individuals who responded civilly, most threw insults my way – reluctant on engaging in any sort of actual conversation: “You’re creepy,” “You’re daft,” “What the hell is wrong with you?,” “You’re stupid,” “You’re an idiot,” “I bet your parents wish they never had you,” “I’m going to get you canceled,” etc.

- It was quite commonplace for word-twisting to ensue among my respondents. I could have said, “Abuse is horrible, especially for children,” and they would have said, “What, so you support abuse of the elderly?”

- Even among the handful of civil responders, no one provided any solid evidence to back up their argument. All I received were: Abbreviated clips; rumors; and debunked conspiracies.

- Red herring questions were more common than alterations in LeBron James’s receding hairline.

- When I fact-checked an error made by a respondent, the reaction was typically a move of the goalpost.

- While some ignored my questions altogether, others used my questions as a means to attack me.

- Only one person saw that I was playing devil’s advocate (only one person who publicly acknowledged it anyhow).

- Without ever saying I supported one vantage point or another, by simply asking questions; fact-checking; and seeking to see the entire picture, I was often accused of supporting the other side.

 

Overall, I can’t say I was shocked at the reactions I received, but I was disappointed. I’m used to making self-described conservatives angry with my fact-checks, questions, and wisecracks, but not fellow self-described progressives or liberals. While I still think Democrats, such as myself, are more inclined to seek the full truth and remain open-minded about most issues, it does seem, like many modern-day Republicans, there is a minority of Democrats who just read what they want to read; hear what they want to hear; and essentially act like cultists.

 

Moving forward, that’s the question I’d like to ask my fellow progressives, liberals, and Democrats: Do we simply want to be the antithesis of the Republican Party politically, yet the same philosophically or do we want to starkly discern ourselves from them both politically and philosophically? Unless the GOP starts investing in investigative journalism, science, and fact-checking, I’d like to go the latter route, for how are we better than the Donald Trumps, Matt Gaetz’s, Jim Jordans, and Sean Hannitys of the world if we behave like them and only cherry-pick the reports, findings and fact-checks we like? I don’t care how many insults get thrown my way; I will forever stand up for equality and truth, and I won’t sacrifice the latter for the former.

 

From Snark to Finish

For my “From Snark to Finish” segment this week, I thought I’d concoct a top ten list. Here are the “Top Ten Ways You Can Survive the Twitter-Mob.” That’s “Top Ten Ways You Can Survive the Twitter-Mob.”

 

10. Just tweet the message “Hello,” for it’s the only message which won’t offend a single person.

 

9. After every angry reply you receive, respond, “I love you, boo!”

 

8. Write a Top Ten List about how to survive a Twitter-mob.

 

7. Repeat responders’ words back to them, only replacing every pronoun with “Humperdinck.”

 

6. Make your profile photo that of Puss In Boots kissing a baby while planting an American flag near a crucifix.

 

5. Call Cyber-Tommy, Donny, Jimmy, and Joey to take care of bidness.

 

4. Repeat “It could be worse” 100 times before looking through YouTube comments.

 

3. Realize these individuals are angry for a reason – they probably haven’t gotten laid for at least three administrations.

 

2. Picture Yoda in a porno, reciting “The Gettysburg Address” while going to town. See? It’s working already, isn’t it?

 

1. (drumroll) Create a new social media app, called, “Say That Shit To My Face.”

 

That’s it for today’s episode. I’ll see you again next week. Until then, you can check me out on Podbean, Twitter, Amazon, and Blogger. This has been I Feel Snitty, with Craig Rozniecki. Take care.