Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Josh Drummond's avatar

What most infuriates me about sociopathic media personalities is their use of safe spaces. They say the most inflammatory things possible, vile statements carefully calculated to be cruel, and hide behind the rule of law from mob justice; they hide behind free speech laws to spread intolerance while joyfully attacking and suppressing the speech of everyone they dislike. They produce fact-free, blithe opinions that they can churn at out thousands of times the speed of someone who painstakingly assembles a piece from known or unknown knowns; and count on the mass media's bias for conflict and hegemony-worship to give them a platform - which always works.

Perhaps oddly, it's not the sociopaths I take issue with. I think they're inevitable; the sociopaths will always be with us. My problem is with the media who give these people platforms. The correct course of action when confronted with someone who writes for your publication cheering on or denying a genocide (or ethnic cleansing, or mass murder via "targeted" munition; I'm trying to forestall people who love to quibble the terminology, when a simpler solution is just to agree that indiscriminate mass murder of innocents is *wrong*) is to go "welp, no more column for you." Media love to hide in their free speech safe space when confronted with this, but this lofty superiority evaporates when confronted with the fact that there are many, many things that fall under the banner of "free speech" that they absolutely will not deign to print. Let's see them give a column to a die-hard Stalinist, or a paedophilia advocate! They won't, even though it's free speech, and (obviously) I agree with them; such views do exist, but they don't deserve airtime. The uncomfortable conclusion, which media resolutely avoid coming to, is that *some* mass murder is okay to cheer on; *some* people are worthy of constant denigration. The better, almost inevitably, if these people are the brown citizens of a geopolitically inconvenient polity, or members of a scapegoated gender minority who have the temerity to plead for their continued existence. In short, it's the media's fault. No one is making them do this, and yet, here we are.

In a better world, we would organise society on the principle of identifying sociopaths and making sure they got a nice little house and the best possible mental health care while carefully denying them platforms or power. And we don't need unethical, invasive Minority Report-style systems to identify them; all we need is the continued existence of Twitter. Given the opportunity, these people will hang out their whole arse and paint a target on it. "Look at me! Look at me! I'm a total creep." They can't resist.

Expand full comment
Plague Craig's avatar

I've been reading some information about how Sean Plunkett is actually a robot alien who eats children, and no-one is stopping him. I've been spreading this to my most suggestible, impulsive, excitable friends. It's a laugh

Expand full comment
59 more comments...

No posts