Skip to content

Pretty Bad Ways to Start a Conversation

2016-07-19 · letter vlog · John · 3:38 · watch on YouTube

Topic: Internet & YouTube (also: Pop culture, US politics & society) · mode: Personal essay · tags: self correction, community lore

Using a Kanye West lyric from 'Power', John argues that name-calling, a vague 'they', gotchas and outrage are bad ways to start conversations that still work because hostility gets answered with hostility; he admits his own unsupported gun statistic, praises Hank's plus-sign reply trick, and asks viewers for more ideas.

What is said

The parts of the video and what is said in each (★ — how much it matters to the video).

00:00:00 — Sarah's Case for Kanye West video; the 'Power' lyric and its two readings as bad conversation starters

  • ★★ John calls Sarah's Art Assignment video The Case for Kanye West brilliant; since watching it he has listened more carefully to Kanye's music. — 00:00:02 · Sarah Urist Green, The Art Assignment

  • ★★★ John says the grammatical ambiguity of the 'Power' lyric 'they say I was the abomination of Obama's nation, that's a pretty bad way to start a conversation' is important. (hedged) — 00:00:10 · Barack Obama

    “they say I was the abomination of Obama's nation. Well, that's a pretty bad way to start a conversation.”

  • ★★★ Against the objection that Kanye didn't mean it, John says authorial intent doesn't matter. — 00:00:24

  • ★★ John says Kanye is that smart; sometimes he's an offensive buffoon, but so are a lot of smart people. — 00:00:24
  • ★★★ John says calling someone the abomination of Obama's nation is a bad conversation starter: it is name-calling and uses cleverness to seem correct. — 00:00:31 · Barack Obama
  • ★★★ John says 'they say' is also a bad start: a non-specific 'they' constructs a false us-versus-them dichotomy. — 00:00:42 · othering
  • ★★ John says most Kanye critics weren't calling him that; they criticised other things, which Kanye simplified and repackaged to seem ridiculous. — 00:00:52

00:01:04 — Bad conversation starters in contemporary discourse: gotchas, nicknames, wit as accuracy, calling voices shrill

  • ★★★ John says these bad conversation starters are common in contemporary discourse: gotcha moments in the 24-hour political news cycle, diminutives and name-calling. — 00:01:04
  • ★★ John says nicknames from 'Canadian Cruz' and 'Crooked Hillary' to 'Lying Donald' and 'Barry Obama' undermine and demean people too vaguely to defend against. — 00:01:14 · Donald Trump, Barack Obama
  • ★★ John lists more: rhetorical questions, certainty in one's opinion, wit masquerading as accuracy, citing one study instead of the bulk of evidence, presuming opponents merely wrong. — 00:01:23
  • ★★ John's current favourite: accusing a voice you don't like of being shrill, shouty or aggressive even when it isn't. — 00:01:37

00:01:48 — John's own unsupported gun-sales statistic on Twitter

  • ★★ John admits he does this too: he tweeted that 40% of US gun sales involve no background checks, a totally unsupported statistic, spreading misinformation before checking. — 00:01:48 · Twitter

    “which turns out to be a totally unsupported statistic”

    • a number in question (doubtful): "40%" — check against the recording

00:02:04 — Why outrage works: hostility answered with hostility, social media architecture, controversial comments that change no minds

  • ★★★ John cites research that rude, aggressive and inaccurate comments lower the quality of conversation and make people feel more angry and afraid. — 00:02:04
  • ★★★ John says these bad conversation starters are effective because we all feel compelled to respond: hostility generally gets answered with hostility. (hedged) — 00:02:13
  • ★★★ John says when outrage is triggered we share and reply as social media's architecture values, so trolling is poisonous but works. — 00:02:24
  • ★★ John says that is why most YouTube comment sections show the most controversial comments first, not the most interesting, generous or nuanced. — 00:02:34 · recommender system
  • ★★★ John says controversial comments get replies but don't change minds: screaming at each other is a bad way of listening and of getting heard. (hedged) — 00:02:43
  • ★★ Granting it's easy to say with a platform, John says no one has ever changed their mind because they were called an idiot. (hedged) — 00:02:53

00:03:01 — Hank's plus-sign reply after his race video's comment section; ask for more suggestions; sign-off

  • ★★ John loved Hank's video last week (week of 11 July 2016) on race and racism in the US, but its comment section was a disaster. — 00:03:01 · Hank Green
  • ★★★ John says Hank's hankschannel video asking people to reply with a plus sign to comments they agreed with tricked YouTube's comment algorithm, making commenting more civil and productive. — 00:03:07 · hankschannel, recommender system
  • ★★ John says the plus sign was small and imperfect but made a real change, and he will use the plus-sign reply from now on. — 00:03:20
  • ★★★ John asks Nerdfighters for other suggestions to improve the quality of conversations here and in the wider world; he'll be in comments trying to listen. — 00:03:27 · Nerdfighteria

In the description and comments

  • ★ The description points to a study of how poor-quality comments affect the internet experience of creators and consumers alike, behind John's point that rude comments harm conversation. — video description

Threads in this video

Where the stories that moved here went next

Mentioned

Central: Kanye West · Power

Also: People: Barack Obama · Donald Trump · Hillary Clinton · Ted Cruz

Projects: The Art Assignment

Works: The Case for Kanye West

Organizations: Twitter

Concepts: authorial intent · misinformation · moral outrage · name-calling · othering · recommender system

Products: YouTube comments

Only in the description or credits: hankschannel · Sarah Urist Green

Replies to

  • continues · On Lives and Mattering — “Hank, I really loved your video last week about race and racism”

← Previous: On Lives and Mattering · Next → Ending the Age of Outrage (at least in ourselves, if not in the world)