[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Miscellaneous See other Miscellaneous Articles Title: Our Uncivil Society and Internet Abuse I first read Saul Bellow's masterpiece, Mr. Sammler's Planet, back in my college days in the 1970s, but I recently began thumbing through my dog-eared copy again. I can only guess at what unconscious motive was working in me, but once I began reading, I became convinced that Mr. Sammler's description of our planet, circa 1969, was remarkably prescient: All this confused sex-excrement-militancy, explosiveness, abusiveness, tooth-showing, Barbary ape howling. Or like the spider monkeys in the trees, as Sammler once had read, defecating into their hands, and shrieking, pelting the explorers below... I'm referring to the appalling incivility that seems endemic in our culture these days. Witness the recent bullying and abuse of a 68-year-old bus monitor, Karen Klein, at the hands of a bunch of seventh graders. Or consider the vilification and threats of violence directed at infectious disease expert Dr. Paul Offit following his debunking of the supposed vaccination-autism link. With regard to the anonymous, venomous bilge that clogs the Internet these days, as my New York relatives would say, fuhgeddaboudit! Yes, I know: Harassment and rudeness have always been with us. And yes, I also know psychologist Steven Pinker's argument that modern times are actually less violent than, say, the Dark Ages. Perhaps. But as a child of the '50s and '60s, I can't deny what my own senses and sensibilities tell me: The world has grown crasser, crueler, and ruder since I was a boy. (Our school bus driver, a gruff but decent older man named Lester, commanded instant respect and would have dealt with abusive taunts by stopping the bus and glowering down at his abusers. But then, the worst outburst among my bus-riding cohorts consisted of singing "Tell Laura I Love Her," loudly and off-key.) I'm far from alone in perceiving that rudeness has flourished apace in recent years. In a blog (June 15, 2012) titled "Dearth of Civility in the Public Square," commentator Gwen Ifill described an online survey by Weber Shandwick and Powell Tate. Sixty-three percent of the 1000 people surveyed said America has a civility problem, and 72% believe things have gotten worse in the past few years. Why the Incivility? What has spawned this general decline in courtesy and its more uncouth brother, the rise of incivility?I suspect there are numerous causes, including the failure of many parents to set a good example for their children. (As the Talmud shrewdly observes, "The child's talk in the marketplace is either of his father or his mother."). But even the most diligent parents can't control what their children are exposed to outside the home. Furthermore, there are forces at work in our society that seem to have increased narcissistic traits in young people -- and where narcissism leads, discourtesy often follows. In their book The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement, Jean M. Twenge, PhD, and W. Keith Campbell, PhD, point to "the relentless rise of narcissism in our culture." These authors identify several social trends that have contributed to this problem, including what they term "the movement toward self-esteem" that began in the late 1960s and the movement away from "community-oriented thinking" that began in the 1970s. They also point to "...the new parenting culture that has fueled the narcissism epidemic." In effect, the authors argue that there has been a shift away from limit-setting toward letting the child get whatever he or she wants. Maybe so -- but right or wrong, Twenge and Campbell have identified what I see as a growing trend. Finally, there is the matter of the Internet -- that double-edged sword that can be wielded against a brutal dictator or aimed brutally at a lonely, marginalized classmate. As a psychiatrist who posts blogs on several Websites, I am appalled by the level of anonymous invective on many poorly monitored sites. I am comfortable with constructive criticism and have sat with my share of verbally abusive (and often intoxicated) patients, but sometimes the menacing comments I read online literally raise the hairs on the back of my neck. One colleague of mine, a humane and broad-minded soul who tried to "reach out" to online critics of psychiatry, found himself so vilified on one popular Website that he suspended his postings, at least until the site improves its screening policies. Christopher Wolf, an attorney who leads the Internet Task Force of the Anti-Defamation League, observes the following: People who are able to post anonymously (or pseudonymously) are far more likely to say awful things, sometimes with awful consequences, such as the suicides of cyberbullied young people. The abuse extends to hate-filled and inflammatory comments appended to the online versions of newspaper articles -- comments that hijack legitimate discussions of current events and discourage people from participating. Anonymity also facilitates the posting of anti-Semitic, racist, and homophobic content across the Web.[1] In my view, anonymous "flaming" on the Internet is both a symptom and a cause: It is a symptom of a society in which, all too often, "anything goes" and is a contributing cause of further abusive behavior. Declining levels of civility in our culture have encouraged anonymous, "drive-by" postings on the Internet, but these postings, in turn, encourage further abusive remarks, in a vicious cycle of reinforcement. Alas, physicians are far from immune to this contagion of incivility and too often contribute to it. To be sure, as Wolf points out, "...we have had a great tradition of anonymous political speech" in this country. And there are occasionally compelling reasons for remaining anonymous or for using a pseudonym when posting blogs or comments on the Internet. Someone who risks physical abuse or stalking from a psychopathic ex-spouse; a political dissident who faces retaliation by an authoritarian regime; an employee who will probably be fired if the boss reads what he or she has posted online -- all of these people may have legitimate reasons for disguising their identities. In rare cases, it may also be necessary to disguise one's identity to protect 'someone else's safety or privacy -- for example, a patient whose case one urgently wants to discuss in an online forum. (Most such cases, however, can be sufficiently disguised by altering or omitting key elements of the patient's identity, such as age or other personal details, age, etc.[2]) Even so, I doubt that these considerations apply to most anonymous and occasionally abusive online commentators. For the abusers, maintaining anonymity is merely an excuse to unleash a barrage of insulting or hateful language at no cost. As a healthcare professional, I find it particularly galling when someone claims to be a physician and posts an anonymous, "flaming" comment directed against a named colleague. This is not merely obnoxious and irresponsible, it is also cowardly. I was therefore greatly satisfied to learn of Medscape's new policy (June 27, 2012): "...we have removed the ability to post comments anonymously in our physician-only discussion forum, Medscape Connect, and in all Medscape blogs." A similar policy is also in place on the Psychiatric Times Website. On the other hand, I was shocked some months ago to find that the widely respected New York Times Magazine now publishes, in its print edition, anonymous or pseudonymous comments. In my view, this is a bad precedent for print journalism, but I fear that it is a harbinger. A free society thrives on robust and passionate debate. I am not arguing that our online discourse should sound like conversation over tea and crumpets at Buckingham Palace. However, I am urging that our exchanges be marked by basic respect and civility and by a willingness to take responsibility for what we say and how we say it. Physicians ought to be in the vanguard of such an Internet reformation. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
#1. To: Tatarewicz (#0)
LOLAYGCS!! You dishonorable, nutless, gutless coward and Ct freak!! (joking!, am new to here, sorta, because of this exact kind of shit) Btw. does this forum allow homosexuals from Alaska here? 8)
#2. To: Dead Culture Watch (#1)
No reason to exclude gays because of a mistake made at a critical brain wiring moment in the past, especially since schools and most parents didn't gay-proof youth by emphasizing discretion when imprinting sexual predispositions. But anyone can make a mistake as the hedgehog said as he got off the hair brush.
I think it might be best to leave the Gay Canary where he is.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||