I'm not sure this is bad though? Are we sure that "beefing" isn't just the sign of people having more leisure and using it in the way people like best, by squabbling, relatively bloodlessly?
-
-
Replying to @s_r_constantin @Meaningness
Well it’s destroyed careers and mental health for a lot of people so bloodless != harmless
3 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @vgr @Meaningness
I guess you’d feel those were bigger deals if you’re close to the people harmed. I know that stuff happens but I’m comparing to worse alternatives. What do you think of the theory that entertainment absorbs energy that might be otherwise used for war or civil unrest?
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @s_r_constantin @Meaningness
That’s a first-order comparison. Football’s damage is kinda limited to say a few athlete brain injuries. CW damage is *designed* to find pathways to policy influence that ultimately lead to wars, police states, re-education camps etc, beyond basic PTSD of participation.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
The CW has *already* metastasized into all those things you seem to agree are bad. Around the world. It shares features with entertainment, but unlike video games or TV, both direct and metastasized damage NPV is not speculative.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
CW inspired/shaped policy on all sides both domestically and internationally has been systematically destructive and degenerative. Negative sum, not even zero sum. Nothing generative ever seems to come if it.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @vgr @Meaningness
I can think of examples supporting that but again I don’t know if it’s a significant effect? Have you seen any good analysis of this?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @s_r_constantin @Meaningness
Nope. Almost all the intelligence is in backchannel conversations among people who track this stuff. Significant effect is a statistician’s way of thinking about this. It’s a poor frame because the impact is much more direct and causal-narrative.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @vgr @s_r_constantin
I’m not understanding something here. The President’s twitter account is exhibit 1, I would think? And it is the most consequential force in contemporary politics?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @vgr
I can’t tell, really! How often does he actually do his own policy? How much will that policy be reversed? Do presidents even matter?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Well, I’ve expressed the same uncertainty (attached). But I think nearly everyone would say you are setting the evidential standard very high here.pic.twitter.com/ioVEMQdtAn
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness @vgr
Well, when I read pieces like
@vgr’s about how crappy political discourse is, I assume that’s because he sets the standard really high!0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.