"politicization" of the internet?

[xenu]

over the past year and a half i've noticed that a large majority of the internet has been acting as a self-contained political force. if you remember last year's SOPA fiasco then you'll know exactly what i'm talking about. sites like reddit (i'm refraining from using the rather obnoxious term 'social media' here) are primarily responsible for this; reddit in particular has become a nexus for the spread of atheism and libertarian political ideologies (not that that's a bad thing) and a breeding ground for memes of all sorts.

when i say 'memes', i don't mean your everyday image macro. a meme is any concept or idea that can spread memetically, that is to say, be rapidly cross-pollinated between individuals or as in this case, between entire websites. kony 2012, for instance, was a meme and so were SOPA/PIPA and the Occupy movement. memes are extremely powerful tools when in the right hands, and are in fact the fastest way to spread ideas across a large populations. the greatest strength of the meme is that it can originate from a decentralized source; a meme can start at a small, disconnected messageboard and still be proliferated throughout the internet. so the benefits of a well-structured memetic system are obvious - speed of communication is increased and so is the availability of information. some would even argue it functions as a self-defense mechanism of sorts, seeing how the "threats" of SOPA, CISPA etc were so effectively combated.

the flow of information goes both ways, however, and thus is a double edged sword. it is possible to force memes - hell, i've done it before. even though the possibilities of forcing a meme may seem harmless at first, consider this: if it's possible to force an innocent meme, it's also possible to force an entire ideology. it's happening already; those of you who are redditors, why do you think celebrities volunteer for AMAs? to interact with their fans? maybe, but their primary purpose is to get themselves talked about; in other words, to create a meme. it's the dream of every advertiser, every PR person to force a meme. every corporation wants to BE a meme. anyone else seen those insurance ads where they needlessly reference lolcats? what about the new futurama ads where they use that "not sure if..." macro, hoping for internet-savvy viewers to discuss the show online?

why do you think chic-fil-a garnered so much corporate opposition during the whole gay marriage incident? it's not like most companies to get themselves involved in political controversy, but if it meant pandering to potential customers on the internet, they would. what about the large amount of companies that dropped their support for SOPA after reddit decided to collectively boycott any company that did support it? what about obama, promising to overrule SOPA if it were passed? riding on the back of a meme is the most effective way to get to potential customers and voters, and everyone is doing it.

and then there's anonymous, the group that finds support by drumming up fear for "internet freedom". i'll admit -- i was sucked into the anonymous ideology at some point in my life. what vacillating teenager doesn't want to be a masked vigilante, fighting for a noble cause? and all by sitting at the computer? part of the reason why anonymous is so wildly popular (read: a meme) is because it's so fantastically convenient. anyone not diametrically opposed to internet freedom would consider themselves a "part of anonymous" or at least support them to some degree. don't be fooled by their self-gratifying definition of "collective"; anonymous is a cult in the strongest sense of the word.

remember when anonymous hacked into the IRS database and published romney's tax returns? wait what, anonymous is telling you to vote for the dems now? and again, because anyone can claim to be part of anonymous, it's impossible to tell whether this was really an action of anonymous or just a clever democrat campaigner attempting to force a meme. it doesn't matter, of course; a lot of people have already been influenced, even if subtly, and will go on and influence other people, and so on. successful meme is successful.

the last thing i want to sound like is a conspiracy theorist, but this sudden "politicization" of the internet at large worries me. as reddit continues to be the "socially conscious" e-superpower, as anonymous continues to take down symbolic political targets, they put the future of the internet at stake. i find it ironic how reddit and anonymous, both fervent advocates of net neutrality are the prime catalysts of a politically-controlled internet. i don't oppose reddit's ideology at all; it's their methodology which i hate.

i'd use the old adage "the internet is leaking" but that hardly seems appropriate anymore. it seems more as if the internet has run dry, and opportunist corporations and governments are climbing through the cracks in its walls the discover a naive, easily manipulated populace fit for the reaping. i hate to be grim, but if the internet's political crusade doesn't stop it may backfire on us and the very notion of 'internet freedom' will seem like a thing of the past.

discuss!

 

[billymills]

You obviously have no idea what net neutrality means. Please look it up.

You are overusing 'meme.' I think you mean publicity or viral, depending on how you use it. (A video goes viral; people go on reddit for publicity.)

I don't understand what you have against anonymous or reddit. There are obvious concerns with them (illegal hacking in anonymous' part, a lack of credible fact checking and reliability on a lot of major reddit threads) but you seem to raise none of them.

It is very possible for reddit to be abused, and it certainly has been. KONY2012 may be one of the most obvious examples, but I don't think you have provided any justification that this is a democratic plot or that opportunist corporations or governments are abusing it.

Claiming that anonymous is a government/democratic/corporate plot is even more laughable, as the only thing anonymous consistently appears to support is freedom of information, which, correct me if I'm wrong, all three of the named do not support.

 

[elcheeso]

I'm not entirely sure what you're arguing against here. People propagating political messages they consider important online? That people care about political bullshit that may or may not originate from corporate or political PR people? Vaguely liberal slants on the political memes that go around? It's a little confusing. Net neutrality has nothing at all to do with what "memes" are spread, it's just about a lack of restriction on internet content... unless you're suggesting that people who spread these messages (ala the Chic-Fil-A controversy) are somehow diminishing what is and isn't allowed on the internet? C'mon.

Also I think you're overstating this politicisation, it's not anything new. It's just there are now more people on the internet than ever, and all the relatively new social media sites (like Facebook and what have you) that make it easy to spread whatever message you're trying to go for.

 

[Trax]

You say it as though other media forms such as newspapers, radio and TV news don't have agendas too.

 

[xenu]

You obviously have no idea what net neutrality means. Please look it up.

I don't mean net neutrality in the strictest sense, but just the social results of its realization. Political neutrality that will arise as a result of immunity to external interference, for example.

You are overusing 'meme.' I think you mean publicity or viral, depending on how you use it. (A video goes viral; people go on reddit for publicity.)

A "meme" is not the same as "publicity" or "viral". A meme gains publicity or becomes viral, but isn't synonymous with either of them.

I don't understand what you have against anonymous or reddit. There are obvious concerns with them (illegal hacking in anonymous' part, a lack of credible fact checking and reliability on a lot of major reddit threads) but you seem to raise none of them.

"illegal hacking" is what the anons do for sport, and the "lack of credible fact checking" is hardly a problem. as I said in the OP, my main beef with reddit/anon is their methodology, not their ideology.

It is very possible for reddit to be abused, and it certainly has been. KONY2012 may be one of the most obvious examples, but I don't think you have provided any justification that this is a democratic plot or that opportunist corporations or governments are abusing it.

you've obviously misunderstood me; I was citing KONY 2012 only as an example of how memes can spread rapidly and across different platforms. I never explicitly or implicitly accused it of being a democratic plot.

I'm not entirely sure what you're arguing against here. People propagating political messages they consider important online? That people care about political bullshit that may or may not originate from corporate or political PR people? Vaguely liberal slants on the political memes that go around? It's a little confusing. Net neutrality has nothing at all to do with what "memes" are spread, it's just about a lack of restriction on internet content... unless you're suggesting that people who spread these messages (ala the Chic-Fil-A controversy) are somehow diminishing what is and isn't allowed on the internet? C'mon.

The point I'm trying to make is that because of how easy Reddit and Anonymous (There are others, but I'm focusing on these two right now) have made it to spread a meme, they've effectively made themselves vulnerable to being influenced by the same memes. You have to understand that an individual on reddit is essentially a binary; you are either an upvote or a downvote. The beliefs of governments and firms are extremely fickle and can be changed to align with reddit+anonymous's ideology of internet freedom. By trying to get corporations on "their side", reddit may achieve the wikipedia definition of net neutrality. But the memetic weakness of reddit (and by extension, the internet) remains, and is open to abuse (again, not claiming anything here, just stating the possibility). Sure, ISPs won't censor anything or block P2P downloads, but if people become so easy to influence, the internet isn't really free, right?

You say it as though other media forms such as newspapers, radio and TV news don't have agendas too.

Years of stigma against the mainstream media has basically numbed these forms of communication and they're not nearly as effective in influencing public opinion. The average redditor or anon considers himself a part of a community, a larger whole, and if this person sees his fellow redditors and fellow anons supporting something, he's likely to support it too, much more likely than if he saw an article in a newspaper or a propaganda flyer about the same thing.

 

[elcheeso]

But the memetic weakness of reddit (and by extension, the internet) remains, and is open to abuse (again, not claiming anything here, just stating the possibility). Sure, ISPs won't censor anything or block P2P downloads, but if people become so easy to influence, the internet isn't really free, right?

No. You're witnessing society in action. Net neutrality doesn't really imply political neutrality from it's denizens, it's just a lack of censorship. Even if 99% of the US's population somehow turned into the Borg and had the same opinion on everything, as long as the 1% is allowed to put up websites decrying the "evils" of the Borg, the net is still free (even if the Borg swarm the comments to complain about how awful the website is). Not every opinion has to be given validation/approval from society at large in order to create a free internet.

It's pretty much exactly how society in general works. People are always trying to influence others, whether the influencers are PR firms or just regular citizens, and people are always being influenced. This isn't new. It's like how racist bullshit went from being one of the most popular forms of entertainment to something that now (usually) has to be heavily coded in order to avoid complaints. Are you suggesting that social media that makes it easy to spread political messages has to be destroyed or never used in order to protect ourselves from advertisers and politicians? Asking for people to check sources? Or just complaining for the sake of it?

 

[xenu]

Are you suggesting that social media that makes it easy to spread political messages has to be destroyed or never used in order to protect ourselves from advertisers and politicians? Asking for people to check sources? Or just complaining for the sake of it?

read the OP

 

[billymills]

You clearly have no understanding of net neutrality. Net neutrality is an attempt to prevent vertical monopolies by preventing ISPs and governments from giving preferential treatment to certain sites that they have come to agreements with (advertising deals, ideological agreement, etc.). Net neutrality does not mean the prevention of expression of political, religious or other beliefs on the internet.

KONY is not a meme, it is a viral video. SOPA/PIPA are not memes, they are individual bills. People do not go on reddit to create memes, they go on reddit for publicity. If you want me to quote you misusing 'meme' directly:

kony 2012, for instance, was a meme and so were SOPA/PIPA

why do you think celebrities volunteer for AMAs? to interact with their fans? maybe, but their primary purpose is to get themselves talked about; in other words, to create a meme.

Memes are the behaviors that spread through culture, Occupy movement would be an example, the repeated reaction to internet censorship bills in a similar fashion is a meme. A meme is something that spreads rapidly, claiming that a meme is one of the best ways to spread ideas is like saying a really fast object goes really fast.

If you have no problem with hacking or unverified claims, then what could you possibly have against reddit or anon's methodology.

I have addressed the rest of your points, I believe, but if you really have a problem against simple bandwagoning, that is an issue that has been around for thousands of years. Blaming it on reddit or anonymous is just as good an idea as blaming it on churches, governments, media, or any other public figures. (Churches have survived and thrived off this since the first religions were invented. Polling, rallies, and publicity itself are the same forms of attempting to create bandwagoning.)

If you are going to continue to use the words meme*, net neutrality, and methodology, could you please make it explicitly clear what you mean by those terms?

 

[Glen]

haven't formulated a proper response yet, but billy, i don't really understand how you can claim that kony 2012 wasn't a meme

it was the ultimate self-replicating unit; 17 year old girls on facebook posted about it in a clamour, then their friends did the same, and so on. information was transferred and by extension so was the 'idea' that some dude no one really knew anything about had to be stopped because of some video

 

[xenu]

KONY is not a meme, it is a viral video. SOPA/PIPA are not memes, they are individual bills. People do not go on reddit to create memes, they go on reddit for publicity. If you want me to quote you misusing 'meme' directly:

memetics

The meme, analogous to a gene, was conceived as a "unit of culture" (an idea, belief, pattern of behaviour, etc.) which is "hosted" in one or more individual minds, and which can reproduce itself, thereby jumping from mind to mind.

(sorry about the wikipedia link)

and agreed, net neutrality probably wasn't the correct term for what I wanted to express i.e political/social neutrality, but the point does still stand. i don't see why you're fixating on that particular slip-up instead of responding to the bigger picture

also, anonymous isn't "just" a group of hackers. hackers are actually a very small percentage of anons. "hacking" is not anon's methodology just as "posting unverified claims" isn't reddit's methodology. their methodology is their tendency to stir up populist movements and create controversy around political issues they barely understand (kony 2012? boycott CFA/boycott godaddy? occupy wall street? anonymous vs. scientology?)

click here to see what anonymous is currently up to. very few of anon's "operations" deal with internet freedom and that site a perfect example of how they attempt to force memes or stir up controversy.

 

[billymills]

"an idea, behavior or style that spreads from person to person within a culture."

I assume idea in this context is beyond the simple 'idea' but more along ideology (akin to behaviour and style). A single video can be viral and spread (the virus is the ultimate self-replicating unit) , but I think a meme describes a whole group or style of these videos. Without seeing a whole host of videos along the same lines I don't think it fits a meme.

 

[Trax]

"an idea, behavior or style that spreads from person to person within a culture."

I assume idea in this context is beyond the simple 'idea' but more along ideology (akin to behaviour and style). A single video can be viral and spread (the virus is the ultimate self-replicating unit) , but I think a meme describes a whole group or style of these videos. Without seeing a whole host of videos along the same lines I don't think it fits a meme.

Did you not see all the images, banners, etc that sprung up around Kony 2012?

 

[Glen]

"an idea, behavior or style that spreads from person to person within a culture."

I assume idea in this context is beyond the simple 'idea' but more along ideology (akin to behaviour and style). A single video can be viral and spread (the virus is the ultimate self-replicating unit) , but I think a meme describes a whole group or style of these videos. Without seeing a whole host of videos along the same lines I don't think it fits a meme.

no, that's not what meme means

the dancing baby gif was the first internet meme. it presented nothing more than an idea: a weird and funny dancing baby. people did make spinoffs of it but they were nowhere near as popular as the original, so that's not what made it memetic. understand that 'something imitated' doesnt necessarily entail others creating things in a similar style. if you see someone with an outfit or a hairstyle you like, and you proceed to dress yourself identically, you're imitating him.

i tend to avoid playing this card, but have you read the selfish gene?

 

[Hipmonlee]

I really dont like the term meme. Like, it describes how something develops/spreads , I dont think this is a very useful categorisation. Essentially everything on the internet is a meme. They are hosted, then grow by being linked to, commented on and adapted by the rest of the internet.

To me it feels like it is an attempt to tarnish a movement by associating it with ragecomics and lolcats.

I have not read the selfish gene.

I also never watched that Kony video and know nothing about it, but I am a little curious why this is being described as an abuse of reddit.

(to be honest I dont actually know what reddit is either...)

 

[elcheeso]

read the OP

So basically the former, championing wilful ignorance in fear of being influenced by organisations with an agenda. That definitely sounds just like what the internet needs. :evan:

 

[billymills]

no, that's not what meme means

the dancing baby gif was the first internet meme. it presented nothing more than an idea: a weird and funny dancing baby. people did make spinoffs of it but they were nowhere near as popular as the original, so that's not what made it memetic. understand that 'something imitated' doesnt necessarily entail others creating things in a similar style. if you see someone with an outfit or a hairstyle you like, and you proceed to dress yourself identically, you're imitating him.

i tend to avoid playing this card, but have you read the selfish gene?

I have not read the selfish gene but I do not think it is important for what I am trying to argue. I have no problem with any given definition of meme, but xenu used it to mean multiple different meanings at the same time. I went to a quickly available source (wikipedia citing merriam-webster) to find a concrete definition of the word so that we could use it in an understandable context. (If you have a problem with the definition I presented, I'm perfectly fine on using a different one given I have not read the book where it was defined, so long as the definition is consistent.)

Also 'a weird and funny dancing baby' isn't an idea, that would both definitions of meme presented. Hip brings up a similar point: meme really could mean absolutely everything on the internet if we have a sufficiently vague definition, at which point I'm arguing precision in terminology rather than anything else.

 

[Glen]

I have not read the selfish gene but I do not think it is important for what I am trying to argue. I have no problem with any given definition of meme, but xenu used it to mean multiple different meanings at the same time. I went to a quickly available source (wikipedia citing merriam-webster) to find a concrete definition of the word so that we could use it in an understandable context. (If you have a problem with the definition I presented, I'm perfectly fine on using a different one given I have not read the book where it was defined, so long as the definition is consistent.)

Also 'a weird and funny dancing baby' isn't an idea, that would fail any definition of meme presented. Hip brings up a similar point: meme really could mean absolutely everything on the internet if we have a sufficiently vague definition, at which point I'm arguing precision in terminology rather than anything else.

i would say the context that having read it grants is pretty important considering dude literally created the word

i don't really have a problem with xenu's use of the word because 'meme' is inherently polysemous due to how wide the concept is. i'm as descriptivist as they come, but dawkins' definition is no doubt the hardest one to argue against.

the baby is an idea. it simply has to be. what else would you call it? a 'thing'? it is simultaneously idea and idea-carrying vehicle. the idea is the dancing baby, and the dancing baby is the idea. what makes it memetic is that it was passed around so alacritously.

the problem, you'll find, is that precision with a word like this is not so easy to find nor to create because it is inherently nebulous. a meme is a piece of information transferred from person to person with enough frequency. religion is a meme. how to bake bread is a meme. though the word has colloquially come to mean stuff like rage comics, its broader definition still holds true.