When Nathan Pyle
began his comic Strange Planet, he
was almost certainly unaware that his comments on the absurdity of human behavior
would become an example of social interaction in the outrage era of the
internet. Strange Planet features
stereotypical grey aliens taking part in everyday rituals that most of us take
for granted. In fact, Pyle demonstrates a natural talent for exercising his
sociological imagination, with each comic interrogating how a common situation
might be viewed from an outside perspective. Recently, Pyle’s comic has provided its own
insight into the kinds of interactions he frequently deconstructs through an
unexpected route.
Pyle
has joined the growing ranks of internet celebrities to have their Twitter
history meticulously examined in search of past wrongdoing. Sometimes the
search almost seems malicious in nature, as in the case of James Gunn, fired by
Disney in response to offensive tweets made a decade ago. On the other hand, even
for decidedly normal people there is no room for mistakes in the outrage
culture. Measured conversation about hot button topics has become more difficult
as a direct result of the insulating power of the internet. Social media sites
like Facebook, Reddit, and Tumblr have created communities where everyone participating
in the discussion shares identical views and deviation from those views is
harshly sanctioned. Internet echo chambers actively discourage the kinds of
interactions that foster growth as a community.
Pyle
continues to provide an excellent example through the content of his offending
tweet, which expressed affection for his partner while she voiced her support
of a pro-life movement. Abortion is undeniably one of the most polarizing
issues currently facing the American public. The debate draws in moral,
religious, political, economic, and social views in a way which is unlike many
other issues of public discussion. Each side of the debate often expresses the
view that their side is the only reasonable option, and yet, Gallup polling
shows that the percent of Americans who consider themselves pro-life is nearly exactly
the same as those who consider themselves pro-choice, sitting at 48% in each
camp when polled in May of last year. Abortion is, in many ways, the ultimate
outrage debate.
Pyle
focuses on small interactions in his comic, staying away from most controversial
topics, and symbolic interactionism provides a powerful framework to understand
why outrage conversations play out how they do. When individuals enter an
online space with particular views, they start having small, constant
interactions which reinforce desired behaviors and beliefs. They find hard
boundaries which outline the acceptable views of the community and moderators
and other users are quick to remove unwanted participation, up to and including
banning users who disagree from participating at all. For the most part, these
interactions are short and personal, not systematic implementations of
oppression.
Symbolic
interactionism might just provide a way out of the echo chamber outrage as
easily as it facilitates it in the first place. If people focused more on the individual
and less on the outrage that individual represents, small interactions could teach
us that we have more in common than we think. The same Gallup poll from earlier
which showed a polarized public also shows surprising agreement. 60% of those
polled said that abortion should be legal in the first three months of pregnancy,
while 81% said it should be illegal in the last three months. Those responses
show a much more harmonious public than simple asking people whether they were
pro-life or pro-choice. The agreement continues when considering specific
situations. 83% and 77% said abortion should be legal during cases when the
woman’s life is endangered and in cases of rape, respectively, with the highest
levels of support for abortions taking place early in the pregnancy.
This
information could provide a new place to start the discussion, and in some cases
people seem open to it. After conversations with those who worked with him,
James Gunn was hired back to his original role. Pyle seemed open to
conversations on Twitter for a time before he was drowned out. These situations
only happened because people were willing to sit down and genuinely interact
with each other, even when the outrage culture would tell them not to. There is
a fine balance that needs to be struck between using social media as a tool to
chip away at oppressive structures through successes like the #MeToo movement
while also focusing on the battles that are worth the effort. We must remember
to allow people to change, because without change there will never be improvement.
If people are punished for growth then no amount of interaction or outrage will
solve society’s problems.
Friedersdorf, C.
(2018). Reflections of a Year of Outrage. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/12/year-of-outrage/579100/.
Gallup. (2019).
Abortion. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx.
Pyle, N. W.
(2018). Honor. Retrieved from https://www.instagram.com/nathanwpylestrangeplanet/?hl=en.
As a fan of the Strange Planet comics I was eager to read your blog post. The subject of how polarized many people are on the internet is fascinating to me. It feels like we made the internet without understanding what effects it would have on us as a society, and as a result, the abundance of polarizing viewpoints and a refusal to acknowledge other opinions on the internet seems to have increasingly been seeping into real life.
ReplyDeleteEven though the idea of having a system that allowed you to communicate with anyone anywhere in the world might have seemed freeing at first, these days it feels like it traps us into small communities with very like-minded people, which in turn shuts us off from the people that may be around us or have other ways of thinking. It's hard for me to imagine a solution to this might be, but I think some individuals are doing a great job at deradicalizing some groups of people, like ContraPoints on YouTube. I've noticed she appeals to an alt right audience by understanding their humor and utilizing it, and genuinely considering why she disagrees with their points without making them feel belittled or shamed.