There is a a sustainable ecosystem of right-wingers and followers on Twitter and Facebook. We know that nature spreads misinformation and prejudice, but never mind how it creates magical trends – where a few subtleties can make something seem more popular than it really is. Time and time again, research has shown how easy it is to create information silos and how few accounts are needed to create such an impression.
The consequences on the ground are dire, especially when it comes to giving permission to extremists on the Internet. Before the election, political commentators like Matthew Yglesias said that the Democratic Party should support people who have “ideas” about the right to exchange, because they believe that the issue should cost the Dems important votes. But come Election Day, no red tsunami of anti-trans backlash was created. The belief of men like Yglesias in the mass of non-voters who will cast a decisive vote on this matter is bolstered by the over-emphasized online stories. The far-right Twitter outburst, in all its repetitive fury, is another reason. But extremist views also emerge from mainstream sources.
This week only, The New York Times published another article raising “concerns” about puberty restrictions taken by trans children. Christina Jewett, one of the two reporters who covered the story, was was quickly revealed to be following several anti-trans influencers on Twitter. While it’s not unusual for the media to follow different voices, it’s notable that they’ve narrowly focused on not following people or groups that would have been more important to such a larger story. Anti-trans extremists he returned the favor by encouraging and praising the story.
The range of responses between loudmouths and well-known journalists/experts is confusing. While the Republican Party’s relentless efforts to disarm the voter turnout has turned out many voters, it has created and deepened racism. The terrible stress caused by the constant clamoring of ugly arguments against your right to life should not be ignored. That’s the law to be what has been removed from these moral fears affects real people in physical ways. In this way, a few who have a serious problem in the echo chamber have managed to shape public policy and harm innocent people.
The tight-knit network of anti-trans extremists we see on Twitter is planning to create a license in a unique 21st century way. On the cheap, no less. When they gather before them, the decrease in their number is seen as a day. Online, they can shadowbox above their weight class by chasing a target. The result is the illusion of the crowd. After all, if you’re a trans person who’s been bombarded with 10 or 20 accounts hurling transphobic bile at you, it’s hard not to get upset. But even if all those accounts were true (unverifiable), they would look very sad if they were dressed for show.
The trick here is to convince people that these internet trolls are the pinnacle of a larger ideology, giving voice to many silent citizens for whom genital policing is a priority in a year of war, pandemic, and resilience. price problems. And the most important second half of the pas de deux is the trivialization of Twitter’s self-proclaimed news among a troubled minority in the mainstream media who want what media critic Jack Shafer has called “fake news.”
Mercifully, we’ve all been given a very good example of how misguided and unreality they are here. The politics designed to win the Republican Party in every state has resulted, instead, in humiliating defeats because the candidates were trying to win on MAGA Twitter instead of every family’s kitchen table. no Unexpected to the platform and his many sad followers.
There is something unpoetic about the fact that the Republican Party’s embrace of Twitter is slowly weakening; after all, they deserve each other.
