Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
This is good advice from Walter Kirn. And it goes to the question I pose in the title of this post: "Weather Forecast or Creation?" Let me explain.
I have had a theory for some time that, as humans are part of the natural order, so, too, is mass behavior. Mass behavior is the sum of individual behavior, but something different in the sense that people operate differently in isolation than in crowds. So, like mass natural phenomena, like weather, where forces are acting upon it to move in various directions and create benevolence (gently rain on parched land) or wreak destruction (tornadoes), forces acting upon masses of people create beneficence or destruction.
Weather forecasting has been a boon to humanity, keeping it from being caught unawares. There are numerous stories of unanticipated disasters that could have been avoided or mitigated if a warning preceded them. The analogy in human behavior has been the news industry. With information about events happening elsewhere but connected to one locally, measures could be taken to protect against or mitigate damage to persons or property. An invading army? Flee. A building stock bubble? Sell.
News in the modern era became such an important force that propagandists acquired and controlled news sources to promote desired mass behaviors. In this century people have come to the view that nearly every commercial news source has been captured by propagandists. Thus, the following tweet from 2013:
This is why Elon Musk's X.com is now the "go-to" for news. And also why there are constant fights over the algorithm for promotion and suppression of tweets. The platform is mostly unfiltered and certainly not formally curated. That is a blessing and a curse.
But back to my weather analogy: Social media has the power to create or pacify storms. Using it at any level increases systemic energy. Posting tweets and commentary adds even more energy. As the place to get imperfect but uncurated news, it is a better "forecast" tool than something controlled by propagandists. And that is what is drawing more and more people to it. The downside is that as more people pour in, more energy is created and social media becomes a weather creator, not merely a forecaster.
Walter alludes to this new power and urges us to resist. If we can dial our emotions down and look at the beast with a skeptical eye, we can gain the forecasting benefit without adding destructive energy. But it is a delicate dance. X.com can be like an energized power line -- grab it and it is difficult to let go. Avoid social media and you can replicate it somewhat by balancing the propagandists against each other in the curated news space. But you are denying yourself access to the growing independent media that is actually doing a better job in helping you navigate current events.
Humans are a crazy bunch. We often fail to observe the smoke in the next valley and correctly discern that the raiders are headed our way. On the other hand we generate panics that have no basis in fact. We need to develop a level of detached caution that includes social media. But we have to be aware that there are dopamine merchants out there who want to hook us on their brand of excitement or fear.
Don't isolate yourself, but engage carefully and thoughtfully.
Discussion (8)
MODERATOR • CHARTER MEMBER
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
It also pays to not overestimate how well X reflects the opinions of the masses. Just like on Ricochet, the majority of the comments come from maybe 15% of the members.
MODERATOR
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
True, but the X ecosystem is complex. Everyone who wants a message out there posts on X. The arguments on X, although not completely representative provide a spectrum. Your comment, I think, refers to the intensity to which Americans share a particular point of view. And that’s fair. But the reality is that if there is something real and worthy of a heads up it will more likely be on X than anywhere else.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I don't do X anymore. I pay for an account there, and I do try to get interested now and then, but I figure if it's worth knowing about, it'll be on NR or in the WSJ or Ricochet. However, I do watch the people who get their information on X. It's informative.
Oh, I also watch YouTube and find it fascinating how people left and right just make stuff up. I don't subscribe to any of those channels or watch any further once I figure out that's what they do.
MODERATOR
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Make stuff up or call into existence? That’s the dilemma that prompts this post. It’s like a quantum world of psychology. It’s not there until observed. And yet it becomes a reality with which we must contend at some level. As the saying goes “Just because you are not interested in [fill in the blank] doesn’t mean it isn’t interested in you”. So you still need the forecast and sometimes that’s the only warning you get.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I don't know. One leftwing video on the Trump-Carney conflict over China refers to news the viewers have already seen that in fact nobody has seen, because it can be found nowhere, and then adds its own significant details, with absolutely no clue to help you find where those basic facts came from, and nothing to help verify them, I presume because those facts are made up. Don't trust but do verify.
You're seeing five of eight comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.