Controversial one here.
I lived in London from 2006-2023. I still work in London every day. I've seen London's best and I've seen London's worst. I only use London as it's the only area I have enough experience to talk about, but I wouldn't be surprised if my suspicions ring true elsewhere.
Anyway, I've been out on the town in London at every time of day you can think of, in every area you can think of.
And if I put aside all the rubbish on social media, put away all the preconceived notions that have been fed direct in to my eyeballs by my (admittedly ridiculously high) social media consumption, what have I really witnessed?
I've seen the odd shoplifter, I've had the odd awkward discussion with people on the tube, I've seen loads of rude-bois in their baby BMW 116is, but all this narrative about how "london is lost" and "it's a warzone" and "muslim ray guns" and all that other nonsense? Not witnessed any of it myself.
I bring this up because this video from Evan Erdinger got me thinking. Everything we see on social media is designed for one thing - money. More outrage, more clicks, more misinformation, more ad revenue.
This isn't a thread to discredit what anyone else has experienced, like I said my sample size is only a tiny size of the UK, but it does beg the question: how much of what we read and see is real, and how much is just fabricated outrage for clicks?
I like to think I'm an optimist but when everything you consume on social media is designed to make you revisit and click more, when outrage is such a proven business model (look no further than the red tops for proof of this), and when people seem to be losing their ability to think critically, are we taking it too far?
There is of course no denying that certain walks of life do horrible things, but are those walks being pushed more because it generates clicks?
I dunno. I'm just musing, but zooming out for a moment and looking at the world around me through my actual eyeballs instead of what's being shown to me, it doesn't seem that bad at all.
Whatcha fink GD?
I lived in London from 2006-2023. I still work in London every day. I've seen London's best and I've seen London's worst. I only use London as it's the only area I have enough experience to talk about, but I wouldn't be surprised if my suspicions ring true elsewhere.
Anyway, I've been out on the town in London at every time of day you can think of, in every area you can think of.
And if I put aside all the rubbish on social media, put away all the preconceived notions that have been fed direct in to my eyeballs by my (admittedly ridiculously high) social media consumption, what have I really witnessed?
I've seen the odd shoplifter, I've had the odd awkward discussion with people on the tube, I've seen loads of rude-bois in their baby BMW 116is, but all this narrative about how "london is lost" and "it's a warzone" and "muslim ray guns" and all that other nonsense? Not witnessed any of it myself.
I bring this up because this video from Evan Erdinger got me thinking. Everything we see on social media is designed for one thing - money. More outrage, more clicks, more misinformation, more ad revenue.
This isn't a thread to discredit what anyone else has experienced, like I said my sample size is only a tiny size of the UK, but it does beg the question: how much of what we read and see is real, and how much is just fabricated outrage for clicks?
I like to think I'm an optimist but when everything you consume on social media is designed to make you revisit and click more, when outrage is such a proven business model (look no further than the red tops for proof of this), and when people seem to be losing their ability to think critically, are we taking it too far?
There is of course no denying that certain walks of life do horrible things, but are those walks being pushed more because it generates clicks?
I dunno. I'm just musing, but zooming out for a moment and looking at the world around me through my actual eyeballs instead of what's being shown to me, it doesn't seem that bad at all.
Whatcha fink GD?
