Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I read this piece from the Huff post, its back from 2009, but it really rings truer now more then ever before. I would like to expand on it a bit. It seems to me that fake outrage has taken on a whole new form. 95% of new coverage these days is coving some sort of controversy in where someone was offended on twitter, at school, work, or really wherever.

The news does not even need real stories anymore, as they can make anything into a story now by calling it controversial. People on twitter now are becoming famous just for having fake outrage about anything that happens. If they post at the right time to anything and have a good narrative that the media can capitalize on, it is picked up.

Now with the Trump era, the fake outrageous been magnified ten fold. But what is the root cause? Is it people in the media wanting to make a quick buck for airtime because they know views and the average Joe will scoop it up, thus increasing their rates they can charge for commercials? Or people like Jennifer Miller looking to get an opinion piece in CNN about Mnuchin wife responding to her?

If you turn on the media now, its wall to wall coverage of "controversy" and in this climate anything can be controversial.

Our addiction to fake outrage

Originally posted by Sable
I read this piece from the Huff post, its back from 2009, but it really rings truer now more then ever before. I would like to expand on it a bit. It seems to me that fake outrage has taken on a whole new form. 95% of new coverage these days is coving some sort of controversy in where someone was offended on twitter, at school, work, or really wherever.

The news does not even need real stories anymore, as they can make anything into a story now by calling it controversial. People on twitter now are becoming famous just for having fake outrage about anything that happens. If they post at the right time to anything and have a good narrative that the media can capitalize on, it is picked up.

Now with the Trump era, the fake outrageous been magnified ten fold. But what is the root cause? Is it people in the media wanting to make a quick buck for airtime because they know views and the average Joe will scoop it up, thus increasing their rates they can charge for commercials? Or people like Jennifer Miller looking to get an opinion piece in CNN about Mnuchin wife responding to her?

If you turn on the media now, its wall to wall coverage of "controversy" and in this climate anything can be controversial.

Our addiction to fake outrage

I think social media and the stupid are manipulated not to show real outrage, for instance, phrases like cuck and triggered are to stop people reacting, I think generally on all sides of the political spectrum people are much more passive in first world countries than in previous generations. They don't believe anything so they are not even prepared to stand for something. Pussies.

People are passive but there is also some "extremist leanings" feeding off these outrage tendencies.

During our last presidential elections the Left Winged extreme got a lot of votes from well-faring tax-paying left-leaning middle class. And I assure you, this wasn't because some advancement in how the population understood Social responsability nor even for "class conscience" of any kind. Simply put, people were voting against their benefits because they no longer care about the political system. By voting for these parties they scratch that itch of political activism that they ignore the rest of the year.

So we meet in the part of the analysis where there is a part of the legitimate outrage getting channeled off as minor complaints and nitpicks.

Originally posted by Bentley
People are passive but there is also some "extremist leanings" feeding off these outrage tendencies.

During our last presidential elections the Left Winged extreme got a lot of votes from well-faring tax-paying left-leaning middle class. And I assure you, this wasn't because some advancement in how the population understood Social responsability nor even for "class conscience" of any kind. Simply put, people were voting against their benefits because they no longer care about the political system. By voting for these parties they scratch that itch of political activism that they ignore the rest of the year.

So we meet in the part of the analysis where there is a part of the legitimate outrage getting channeled off as minor complaints and nitpicks. You're French or Dutch? Both those countries are starting to remember their moral socialist roots and are terrified of the far right growing. I see nothing strange about the left gaining ground, their's more to life than low taxes.

There is always some risk of nationalistic left-wing parties muddling the idea of social progress. Here in France the Front National was making a campaign based in social justice and benefits for the lower classes, that's how populism goes these days despite the historical left/right schism.

Originally posted by Bentley
There is always some risk of nationalistic left-wing parties muddling the idea of social progress. Here in France the Front National was making a campaign based in social justice and benefits for the lower classes, that's how populism goes these days despite the historical left/right schism. Yes, I don't disagree with some of this, it always shocks me as you come into Paris by train just how run down the estates are, so poorer people do need more. It does the same for me in London going into London by train. I know France well, I've visited it maybe 30-40 times in my life, some for prolonged periods, my mother lived in Paris for two years in the fifties and has very close ties to several families there. France has always had a strong right/left schism, but embraced neoliberalism in the 90's as did much of Europe.

Originally posted by Sable
I read this piece from the Huff post, its back from 2009, but it really rings truer now more then ever before. I would like to expand on it a bit. It seems to me that fake outrage has taken on a whole new form. 95% of new coverage these days is coving some sort of controversy in where someone was offended on twitter, at school, work, or really wherever.

The news does not even need real stories anymore, as they can make anything into a story now by calling it controversial. People on twitter now are becoming famous just for having fake outrage about anything that happens. If they post at the right time to anything and have a good narrative that the media can capitalize on, it is picked up.

Now with the Trump era, the fake outrageous been magnified ten fold. But what is the root cause? Is it people in the media wanting to make a quick buck for airtime because they know views and the average Joe will scoop it up, thus increasing their rates they can charge for commercials? Or people like Jennifer Miller looking to get an opinion piece in CNN about Mnuchin wife responding to her?

If you turn on the media now, its wall to wall coverage of "controversy" and in this climate anything can be controversial.

Our addiction to fake outrage

At the root of this is that in this day and age hysteria can shut down logical rational debate. From people being focused on statues to people using claims of "racism, sexism, fascism" to shut down conversations.

With Trump it is especially useful. Screech and screech, and if you're questioned just scream racism. If the person you are screeching at happens to represent some actual group, you can probably get the shitty Southern Poverty Law Center to deem them a hate group. Does anyone even take the SPLC seriously anymore? Or have they recognized them for how terrible they are?

But yeah, more and more we see irrational outrage gets you noticed more than legit discourse and facts.

Anecdotal testimony on twitter now can be a nationwide sensation and wind you up on CNN without much vetting.

I'm outraged by this thread and demand your resignation.

Originally posted by BackFire
I'm outraged by this thread and demand your resignation.

Wow, you're like Hitlers ghost was put into a baby and then it was raised and later registered as "BackFire" on a website.

So you read my biography huh?

Never read Mein Kampf, no.

Missing out.

Surtur's weekend just filled up.

Fummin babes. Pm me hun.

Fummin babies

https://www.facebook.com/uokhunni/

Originally posted by Surtur
Never read Mein Kampf, no.


Don't watch the movie. It sucks to. Backfire stars in it himself.

If baby Hitler would have vaped just think about how much suffering would have been avoided?

So you support the "High" Hitler theory then?

https://i.imgflip.com/kfkl3.jpg