Politically-engaged Redditors tend to be more toxic – even in non-political subreddits::A new study links partisan activity on the Internet to widespread online toxicity, revealing that politically-engaged users exhibit uncivil behavior even in non-political discussions. The findings are based on an analysis of hundreds of millions of comments from over 6.3 million Reddit users.

  • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’d imagine the same is true for Lemmy and politically engaged people (at least online) overall.

    • paholg@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not so sure. The study discusses specifically people who engage in partisan subreddits, which is not the same as being politically engaged. It also uses an AI to grade toxicity, which surely mischaracterizes many interactions.

      For example, I have been in communities of a non-political nature, where political discussions occur. These are often about real issues that affect real people in the community, and yet there are people complaining about political content.

      To complain about political content is, at best, a very privileged take, demonstrating that you are in a position where politics do not affect you much. At worst, it is actively hostile behavior with the goal of continuing the status quo and shutting down discourse. I would call most of these kinds of comments “toxic”, and yet the rhetoric is usually fine, so I doubt an AI would agree.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Say you don’t like Linux here and tell me how many people call you a bootlicker lol

        Or even better - “piracy is theft” or “ads keep YouTube free and are thus good.”

        You don’t have to believe it. Just toss it up in a thread as a test and enjoy your next 12-36 hours.

        • Franklin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Just saying things “as a test” is indistinguishable from defending it online. Things like body language, tone and intent do not come across as easily.

          That being said toxic people exist everywhere on the internet it’s a flaw in our biology, we haven’t adapted to communicating this way yet.

          That being said there’s a difference between a bad take like your above examples and condoning oppression and marginalization as some political groups have do.

          One deserves to be defended vehemently.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Just saying things “as a test” is indistinguishable from defending it online.

            Yes this is why it works as a test.

            That being said there’s a difference between a bad take like your above examples

            Only one of my statements is an opinion (I like a plug and play OS I don’t need to configure because I spend all my “customize” energy on my PC itself). The others are objective facts that make people sad.

            This is what I mean by toxicity, and how I know for a fact the test will work

            • Franklin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Testing people like that is not a great if your looking to dissect a viewpoint sounds more like being inflammatory, especially with your word choice.

              Opinions can be bad takes. See > your examples.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I express exactly one opinion there, and it isn’t a “take” at all. “I don’t care for Linux” is not an inflammatory statement except to an absolute zealot.

                • Franklin@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Sorry guess I should have been more clear. All of your examples are opinions as in not demonstrably fact.

                  I don’t particularly mind any OS one way or the other I’ll use the best tool for the job. What I’m saying is a bad take are your proposed scenarios on piracy and ads which there’s no evidence to support, in fact there’s a lot to the opposite.

                  This would make what you said an opinion and by my point of view a “bad take”. Does that make you wrong to express them? No and I never said as much.

                  So I guess I just lost the thread on your point because all of those are just opinions. I was just using a colloquialism. Which brings me back to my point that usually when I see people get heated it’s because people are being bigoted.

                  • SCB@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    All of your examples are opinions as in not demonstrably fact

                    Two of my 3 examples are not opinions lol. Ads do keep YouTube free. Piracy is theft. Those are facts. You can justify your blocking or ads or piracy however you want but that is not an argument against these facts.

                    But we’re getting into the weeds since the point is the insanity with which people respond, so frequently, and not the disagreement itself.

      • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d say if you are politically engaged, the likelihood of you being in a political internet community is fairly high.

        To complain about political content is, at best, a very privileged take, demonstrating that you are in a position where politics do not affect you much.

        Could just be that they don’t care for politics in that community. Time and place for everything and it seems some feel the time and place for politics is everywhere all the time. It can be tiring. I don’t remember what year it was that pretty much every single place was talking about immigration politics. Important topic for sure but a meme community about funny road signs isn’t the place for heated soapboxing about closing down the border.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why limit online? Someone got into a shouting match with me because I didn’t agree with what fox news told him. When I realized what he had dragged me into, I walked away.

      • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because toxicity tends to falter in reality. Not to say there is no toxicity offline, there absolutely is. But you’ll find most of the toxic people have small dog syndrome. They’re all bark until they are face to face with someone. Excluding mob mentality of course.