【聯合報╱By TEDDY WAYNE╱王麗娟譯】
Online, the Angry Man Feels at Home
You don’t need to click for long to encounter Internet outrage.
Log in to a social network and you’ll find it directed at celebrities and civilians alike. Then there’s the bigger game: courts of law, social movements, news media outlets, corporations and governments that annoy people. As an overused joke goes on Twitter, “What are we angry about today?”
|
Angry comments have long been part of Internet culture, as any insult-filled comments section or chat room shows.
But the last few years have seen this anger proliferate in social media, where people proclaim their ethical outrage.
A 2013 study, from Beihang University in Beijing, of Weibo, a Twitter-like site, found that anger is the emotion that spreads the most easily over social media. Joy came in a distant second. The main difference, said Ryan Martin, a psychology professor at the University of Wisconsin, Green Bay, who studies anger, is that although we tend to share the happiness only of people we are close to, we are willing to join in the rage of strangers.
People prone to Internet outrage are looking for validation, Professor Martin said. “They want to hear that others share it,” he said, “because they feel they’re vindicated and a little less lonely and isolated in their belief.”
Internet outrage often says more about the commenter than the cause, and its deployment may do more harm than good, to the instigator and the issue.
In another 2013 study, Professor Martin determined that people susceptible to Internet rage tend to be angrier.
“They expressed their anger less healthily, in maladaptive ways,” he said. “People who rant online in any way tend to get into more physical and verbal altercations.”
Outrage carries a different flavor from pure anger; it suggests an affront to one’s value system as opposed to fury. So whereas a venomous insult from an anonymous commenter simply seeks to tear down another person or institution, an outraged Twitter post from an identified account calls attention to the user’s own probity.
By throwing 140-character stones from our Google glass houses, we preserve our belief that we are morally superior to those who have offended us.
The outraged may be enacting a defense mechanism reinforced by the culture of Internet ire. When you’re upset , it’s difficult to be counterattacked for your ethical injury. To state one’s outrage is to insulate oneself from criticism.
But such responses can overshadow the complexity of a subject, rather than opening up a thoughtful debate.
Furthermore, outraged comments are sometimes more offensive than the originating misconduct.
Mobs breed a sense of anonymity, and in the midst of trending Twitter outrage, Professor Martin said, “you may feel anonymous, even if you’re not really.”
Ultimately, Internet outrage is a way to protest by tapping and clicking rather than boycotting and marching. It is a noble endeavor to become incensed about a cause and risk arrest or toil without acclamation for one’s deeply held beliefs. Less honorable is joining a digital attack as a means of propping up one’s ego.
Perhaps the real problem, Professor Martin suggested, isn’t our rage but our rashness .
“The Internet exacerbates impulse-control problems,” he said. “You get mad, and you can tell the world about it in moments before you’ve had a chance to calm down .”
中譯
點擊時間不必太久，即會遇見網路暴怒。登入某個社群網絡，也會看見對名人或一般民眾的點名批判。還有些更大的獵物（目標）：令網民光火的法院、社會運動、新聞媒體網站、企業和政府。「今天我們怒什麼？」已經成了在推特上推濫了的笑話。
憤怒的評論一向是網路文化的一部分，一如我們在充斥謾罵的評語欄或聊天室所見。不過，過去幾年，這種怒火也開始在社群媒體擴散，人們宣稱自己是義憤填膺。
根據北京北航大學2013年針對微博（類似推特的網站）所做的一項研究，憤怒是在社群媒體上最容易散播的情緒，遙遙領先排在第二的歡樂。綠灣威斯康辛大學研究憤怒心理的心理學教授馬丁說，最大的差異在於，雖然我們喜歡分享與我們親近的人的快樂，我們卻樂於分享陌生人的憤怒。馬丁博士說，喜歡在網上宣洩暴怒的人，是在尋找認同感。他說：「他們渴望聽到其他人也有同感。因為他們自覺在平反，他們的信仰，不再那麼孤單與孤立。」
網路暴怒往往只能讓我們對評論者有更多了解，而不是對事情的原因，而這些發布對煽動者或事情本身卻可能弊多於利。
在2013年另一項研究中，馬丁教授獲致如下結論：容易受網路暴怒影響的人，往往會怒上加怒。他說：「他們以比較不健康、適應不良的方式發洩怒氣，以任何方式在網路上咆哮的人，都更容易陷入更多的肢體和語言衝突。」
暴怒與純粹生氣有著不同的況味，它代表挑釁一個人的價值體系，不單只是發怒。因此，匿名評論者發出惡毒侮辱，是為摧毀另一人或機構，而來自具名帳戶的推特抓狂貼文，值得注意使用者本人是否正直不阿。從谷歌的玻璃屋丟出140字的石頭，讓我們保有我們自己的信仰，認為我在道德上，優於那些惹火我們的人。
這些網路暴怒可能是一種防禦機制，這項機制因網路文化而受到強化。當你發怒時，不太會因為你的道德損害而遭反擊。表達憤怒可把自己隔離起來不受批評。
但這種反應可能反而掩蓋主題本身的複雜性，而非開啟深思熟慮的辯論。
此外，暴怒的評論有時比原來的不當行為更加得罪人。
群眾有種匿名感，馬丁教授說，在推特散播暴怒時，「你可能自覺匿名，即使不是真的如此。」
最終，網路暴怒變成另一種抗議方式，透過觸擊和點擊而非抵制和遊行。為某一目標而熱血，以及在無人喝采下，為自己的高度信仰甘冒被捕危險或付出辛勞，是高尚的行為。較不光榮的，是加入數位攻擊行列，做為提升個人自尊的方法。
馬丁教授說，或許真正的問題不在我們的暴怒，而是莽撞。
他說：「網際網路導致衝動控制問題惡化。你發怒了，而你可以立刻告訴全世界，在你還有機會冷靜下來之前。」
留言列表
