Derek Thompson has listed four “dark laws of online engagement” that explain a lot of what’s wrong with social media, and perhaps a significant part of what’s wrong with America. He discusses their effect on people, especially young men, who are socially isolated. I’d like to look at the way they distort the information that we get on the Internet.
1. Negativity bias increases clicks. As a survival trait, humans pay special attention to bad things. You can survive missed opportunities, but missing one serious danger can kill you. This leads people to pay special attention to any alleged bad news. According to Thompson, just adding negative words without affecting the content increases click-through rates. If it motivates people to take useful action, it could be good, but negative thinking can make people feel helpless. If everything is terrible, the terrible is routine.
As Aaron Ross Powell put it, “The doomer responds by taking any criticism of their ‘it’s hopeless’ assessment, in no matter how narrow the domain, as evidence of complacency in the face of macro-level badness. To believe ‘Things Are Bad,’ you must believe all things are hopelessly bad. Which is just giving up.”
2. Extreme opinions increase sharing. People who throw around overblown accusations such as “Fascism” and “Communism” get rewarded. The words lose their meaning, and people have a hard time picking out the real thing. Posts advocating the armed overthrow of the US government or a new Reign of Terror get a lot of attention.
3. Out-group animosity increases engagement. Increasing engagement gives extra publicity to the chosen enemies, and increased visibility often means greater popularity. A huge part of Trump’s rise to power came from all the people on the Internet who boosted his every outrageous statement. Meanwhile, people saying worthwhile things get neglected.
4. Moral-emotional language goes viral. The phrasing here bothers me. The moral and the emotional are two different things. Moral judgment is supposed to consist of applying principles to actions. People can get emotional about their judgments, just as they can about anything they consider important. Thompson seems to mean the idea that emotions, the “heart” and not principles, are the basis of valid moral judgments. That approach provides unlimited license for double standards. When “we” do something, we feel that it’s good. When “they” do the same thing, we feel repulsed. It’s hard to debate or persuade people who think with their guts.
When these forces drive engagement, we lose nuanced analysis, encouraging news, and thoughtful explanations of how people think. There’s a lot to be angry about these days, but anger by itself doesn’t lead to thorough comprehension, reasoned responses, and productive action. Seeing so many posts driven by the Four Dark Laws sometimes makes me think everyone out there is just stupid. It’s important to remember they aren’t a representative sample of humanity.
As I’ve said before, a good way to maintain perspective is to build a varied set of RSS feeds. It will let you find articles with better analysis and a broader set of facts. You can also control your social media experience by picking a reliable set of accounts to follow and being careful what you boost. When I post to Bluesky, I look for a trustworthy article to link to.
It’s been frustrating that my video, “Yearning to Breathe Free,” hasn’t gotten more views. Maybe I should have titled it “Immigrants get ABUSED, VILIFIED, and MURDERED.” Putting the words in all caps is important.