Is Arson Your Business Model?

Photo by Patrick Hendry on Unsplash

There’s a peculiar thing about the internet, and social media, in particular. 

While it is this incredible and unparalleled form of communication, with a versatility and reach we’ve never seen before, it’s not without its issues (and material ones at that). 

Central among these issues is that, while it’s ostensibly an objective and ‘fair’ medium, it also has the capacity - conceptually and practically - to set the world (or at least some relevant, targeted universe) on fire. 

What I mean by that is that any message you put out that represents anything close to a defined point of view can be harvested for any potential element of controversy - and exaggerated for that precise and targeted effect. 

And such is the viral nature of the medium, that your intended balance or contextual basis can be (intentionally) lost in the ether, in direct relation to the instigator’s ability to cut, sharpen and communicate their selected sound byte across their particular universe. The more sophisticated the instigator, the deeper your measured analysis is buried under an avalanche of emotion, fear and disgust.

It’s for this reason that Talk Show Host Jon Stewart reflected recently that “...the business model of the internet is arson. You can’t make money unless you’re setting fires.” 

There’s no room, it seems, for balanced perspectives, for seeing the potential merits of the other side, and for trying to be objective. Because if you do, someone’s going to get pissed off and they’ll make sure they share it - and if they have any sort of a following, God help you.

The root(s) of the issue here are emotion and laziness. 

Emotion in that the red flags (real or perceived) of injustice or unfairness (aka what we perceive to be bad behavior) spark us into life. When we see or hear something that goes against what we believe in, something that we think isn’t right, our reaction is immediate and visceral. And, very quickly, we mobilize our own channels and platforms to share our displeasure with our communities, who surely have a need to know?

Unfortunately, inherent in this reaction, more often than not, is laziness. We react, but we don’t always think. We jump, when it might behoove us to take a minute to think and reflect. Is this really the entirety of the message? Does it make sense that this is the conclusion to be drawn? Is there any ‘benefit of the doubt’ to be given here? But we don’t ask those questions - it’s so much easier not to. We don’t do the work of thinking - about the basis for the message, the background or the context. It’s far easier to react, judge and act. We don’t consider the repercussions (or we don’t care). It’s easy to let our emotions win. 

And so we have all of the divisions we see and hear about today. Red states and blue states, caricatures of liberal and conservative behaviors that morph into judgments of good versus evil.

But it’s not just politics. This type of thinking extends comfortably and naturally into our personal lives and workplaces as well. And why wouldn’t it? At the end of the day, the internet is simply a magnifier of who we are, our “personality on steroids”, so to speak. We’re all governed by the same biases and the same reflexes, and the emotion and laziness we so readily utilize to set any specific sphere of the internet on fire, are the same traits that govern how we assess and treat those around us. 

Whether we believe someone can do no wrong, or do no right, we distill and synthesize our judgments into iron-clad assessments that are readily shared and communicated to anyone who will listen. But, of course, it’s not the sharing of the good that’s the problem. Our assessments of those we don’t like catch fire much more rapidly than we might give ourselves credit for. And when we don’t think about the consequences, we’re no better than those we claim are so wrong.

We need to be better than that. As hard as it is, we need to pause. We need to exercise a measure of critical thought. We need to exercise judgment that is balanced. And we need to assess the consequences of our communications. 

Less emotion, less laziness.

Sometimes, this means speaking our mind. Other times, it means holding our tongues. A lot of the time, this means giving the benefit of the doubt, even when those around us aren’t inclined to do so. 

The point is, we need to be thoughtful and considered when it comes to people and who we think they really are. Less emotion, less laziness.

Otherwise, we’re nothing more than arsonists.