Tag Archives | Outrage

Outrage Inc.

Horrified by the bailout.
Every week, there is a new “high moral ground” for armchair commentators to climb to and new causes for checkbook activists to throw money at. Both groups pat themselves on the back, feeling secure in their position of social media self-righteousness. It’s easy enough to type words on a screen, to vent, curse and whip oneself into a frenzy over issues, real or imagined. Those words often prove empty when it comes time for action and the money soon dries up for causes, however worthy those causes may be. It is difficult not to be cynical at a time when major humanitarian agencies like the US division of the Red Cross can grossly misappropriate five hundred million dollars that was donated to help rebuild Haiti after the devastating earthquake in 2010. Outrage Inc. cares not for who or what it leaves in its wake and blindly marches on towards its next target, taking the crowd and their cash with it.… Read the rest

Continue Reading

Why do people seem to care more about the suffering of animals than humans?

77n7dLJSa2pEfqFrrxgzBg-default

Alison Nastasi via Hopes&Fears:

Cecil—the 13-year-old male Southwest African lion named after Cecil Rhodes, founder of Rhodesia (known as Zimbabwe since 1980)—was a fixture at Hwange National Park, the country’s largest game reserve and the park’s biggest tourist attraction. He was accustomed to having his picture taken and reportedly trusting of humans. Scientists at Oxford University studied Cecil for an ongoing project about conservation. Last month, Cecil was shot with an arrow and, it is believed, lured out of the protected zone of the sanctuary.

Forty hours later, he was killed with a rifle, skinned, and decapitated. His headless body was missing the GPS tracking collar that he had been fitted with by Oxford’s Wildlife Conservation Research Unit (WildCRU). Walter Palmer, an American dentist and big-game hunter, paid over $50,000 to stalk and kill Cecil. The despised Minnesotan has since closed down his practice after becoming the target of widespread backlash from celebrities, activists and the public (trending on Twitter under #CecilTheLion).

Read the rest
Continue Reading

Why We’re Addicted to Online Outrage

How does outrage serve us? How does it serve you? Share your thoughts disinfonauts.

Zola aux outrages

Zola aux outrages (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

via The Week

When faced citizen to citizen in real-life social situations — with the notable exception of mass political demonstrations — the instincts that outrage porn tries to awaken in us are mostly suppressed or barely felt at all. Imagine treating the person sitting next to you at a bar with the touchy insolence of an internet flame war, or re-interpreting his colloquial impressions about the world according to the tendentious and aggrieved norms of the combox. It’s almost impossible. A guy could get his ass kicked trying. We usually tolerate the bar-stool ingrate, seek points of understanding (and often find a few), or dismiss him as deluded and mostly harmless.

But bathed in the glow of our computers, we imagine that we are in a battle of titanic scale.

Read the rest
Continue Reading

Twitter Censorship Outrage

twitter outrageTalk about cat amongst pigeons: Twitter’s announcement that it will enable country-specific censorship has the twittersphere in uproar. From Al Jazeera:

In an announcement on its official blog, the micro-blogging service Twitter has said it will enable country-specific censorship of content on the site.

True to the form of the medium, the service was immediately abuzz with questions, criticisms and conspiracies about Thursday’s announcement.

In a bid to show the service can still be used for dissent, some users have called for a boycott on Saturday, organised around the hashtag #TwitterBlackout.

In a Forbes article highly circulated on the micro-blogging site early Friday, Mark Gibbs wrote that San Francisco, California-based Twitter was committing “social suicide” with the censorship announcement.

Gibbs’ article raised fears of an algorithm incapable of understanding the sarcasm that permeate the 140-character blasts comprising the service’s contents.

That “computer-driven” filtering for the up to 9,000 tweets per second the service produced last year could not possibly take context and tone into consideration.

Read the rest
Continue Reading