Skip to main content

The Anatomy of Outrage on Social Media


Given how much we outrage on social media on a range of issues, it may be worthwhile to step back to check on the anatomy of what we call outrage:)

It is very likely that we are using the chapeau term ‘outrage’ for the three methods we typically deploy to express our disagreement with an event, a policy decision, an ideology or even a trend:
1)     Outrage
2)     Lynching
3)     Angry lament
And then there is debate, of course, to the extent that is possible on social media 

What sets outrage apart from the others is that it quickly moves ahead of the right vs wrong paradigm to suggestions, solutions and alternatives. Therefore outrage on social media has shown its rare power to galvanise emotion and action, to give everyone with internet the option to rally behind solutions of their choice, new pathways of their imagination. 

It is for this reason that we need to allow outrage on social media to come of age. 

And this can only happen if we allow ourselves to recognise that outrage is different from lynching,and these are both different from angry lament. 

Of the above mentioned three methods of engaging with what we see as an issue worth a public debate, it is only the method of outrage that has the power to create positive transformation, because it provides actionable alternatives. 

Social media's response to the Salman Khan episode falls in the category of angry lament, equally vociferous from opposite camps. 

In the space of a few days Salman Khan has been called a messiah and an idiot, the Judiciary has been called names, and everyone with any means to buy the legitimate services or illegitimate favours of sundry institutions and/or persons has been foul mouthed. 

Salman's supporters have been called morons. Some of his supporters have earned this title because they have called footpath dwellers dogs. Salman's lawyer has been called a spineless lucre lapping liar because he has defended such a client. Those supporting Salman on the basis of his charity work were snubbed saying responses to charity and crime cannot be mixed up as an alibi.

Some so called ‘outragers’ went to the extent of lampooning his family, and their near decrepit fortunes were it not for this pelvic thrusting mediocre money making machine of an actor called Salman Khan. 

All this, knowing fully well that this angry lament will not produce any change in the issue at hand, nor is the lament designed to offer alternatives applicable in the present and in the limited scope of the episode. 

If at all, any semblance of alternative solutions in the form of better road safety laws or homelessness etc were offered in the realm of the future and beyond the remit of the episode itself. 

Contrast this angry lament with solution oriented outrage on issues such as netnuetrality, farmer suicides and land acquisition. And then there is the lynching on social media between those that think they understand Hinduism and everyone else:)
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why call a blog by this name? 'Army of Lovers' ?

"Love," said Phaedrus, "is the oldest of Gods, and one of the most powerful. Give me an Army made up of lovers and I can conquer the world." The  Phaedrus  ( / ˈ f iː d r ə s / ;  Greek :  Φαῖδρος ), written by  Plato , is a dialogue between Plato's main  protagonist ,  Socrates , and  Phaedrus , an interlocutor in  several dialogues . The  Phaedrus  was presumably composed around 370 BC, around the same time as Plato's Republic  and  Symposium .   Although ostensibly about the topic of  love , the discussion in the dialogue revolves around the art of  rhetoric  and how it should be practiced, and dwells on subjects as diverse as  metempsychosis  (the Greek tradition of  reincarnation ) and  erotic love .
Post a Comment
Read more

A Debate That Is Breaking Up The Women's Movement Everywhere

Notions of sexual morality and decency can be divisive externalities in an otherwise value driven discussion on human rights.  Here is how. AmnestyInternational 's  call for decriminalisation of sexwork has yet again pried open the divisions between the women’s empowerment movements around the world. Abolitionists have long argued that sexwork is not only demeaning for women in and of itself, but worse, it leads to trafficking of women and girls and hence should be abolished. Sexworker movements, on the other hand, have hailed the Amnesty policy as a hard won victory. This is a  debate  where notions of morality and decency clash for primacy over justiciable Rights.  The beleagured battleground seems to be the sexworker's identity, her sexuality, her voice and her agency.  
2 comments
Read more

When a whole red-light area is burnt down, what does our conscience say?

On April 15 2008, sex workers' homes in Sitamarhi district in North Bihar were yet again targeted, attacked, and subsequently torched and looted. 12 sex workers and 4 children were brunt alive. Several other sex workers were taken away by the police, some of whom are still missing; several people were booked under the anti-trafficking act. The administration took no interest in protecting the basic citizenship rights of the displaced and victimized sex workers. The camp where the sex workers were housed in the interim did not have food and water, those burnt in the incident did not get access to proper medical care; several people died. Subsequently, after local groups advocated for their return to their dwelling under full administrative protection, the sex workers were allowed to go back to their burnt down homes – but without adequate food and medicine supplies and protection from further harassment. While the local administration is clearly not inclined to make any special...
Post a Comment
Read more