Skidmore Scope Magazine Annual Edition for 2017

32 SCOPE ANNUAL 2017 surface the hate: it’s much better to know about it than not to. Many Americans were reeling after the 2016 election, not realizing just howmuch racism, sexism, homophobia, and hate in general still thrive in the U.S. But social media revealed it long before Trump’s rise. Each public figuremust make his or her own decisions about how to respond to negativity or threats—that’s as true today as for the activists of the 1960s, who risked their lives to make change in this country. There is noway to address hate other than tomeet it where it is, confront it, and counter it with love and empathy. Unfortunately, it’s a long road. — jacobs But social media has also served to amplify hate disproportionately. A while back the New York Times published a piece on how Internet con- nections among people with mental illnesses have given their delusions a feeling of validity. I think social media has done this with hate speech—it has helped to normalize it, as if it’s on par with any other speech. Toss in a celebrity or two, and social media becomes as powerful and alluring as a fan club, in which you can imagine yourself interact- ing with the stars. To counter this, the best one can do is keep hammering away at the facts and educating future generations of better-informed, more discerning citizens. — jochnowitz Careful analysis of complex problems takes time. It cannot compete with the rapid dis- semination of threats by Internet trolls and the targeted finesse of Fox, MSNBC, and other partisan media. Homogenous echo chambers that give rise to certainty tend to diminish the commitment to work toward better but less certain conclusions. That work is the job of schol- ars and deliberative bodies, but, alas, both are losing status relative to online outlets. — oles Social media is a beast that still needs tam- ing. While campaigns like #BlackLivesMatter, #OscarSoWhite, and #SayHerName have led to positive change, we have to contend with the livestreaming of suicides and police shootings. The immediate impact of watching a news event unfold on Twitter leaves us without the proper context in which to place the events and people, creating an analysis vacuum that anyone can fill however they choose. — lantigua-williams My mother used to quote a Swazi saying that can be loosely translated to “The one who opened the pot is not the one who boiled the water.” Social media simply exposes the boiling, but it does not turn up the heat. My first American election was in 2012. I was in a 99% liberal international high school, and my Facebook feed was glossed over by a liberal and tranquil view. Fast forward to 2016, and my feed looked like a bloodbath. Did social media change? No, I added more friends with opposite-leaning beliefs. I am a firm believer in the role of social media as a platform for social change, and I would argue that it has helped increase social awareness of issues like racism and sexism. — shongwe Research is pretty clear that the Internet and social media are fairly modest contributors to polarization. First, modern political extrem- ism began to increase in the late 1970s. Yes, polarization continued to rise during the Obama years, when social media emerged, but these trends predate the Internet. Second, research on religious, social, political, and cul- tural polarization shows that people over 60 years old are the most polarized, while young people are the least, even though they have more exposure to social media. If we’re looking for a media-based explanation for polarization, Fox News and MSNBC, beloved by aging baby boomers, are more likely culprits than Facebook and Twitter. But more important factors include declining social trust, the retreat into the home, geographic and social partisan sorting, increasing diversity, and the mobilization of the conservative movement. — andrew lindner “Alternative facts” My hope is that a backlash to the current politi- cal climate will result in a greater awareness of and, perhaps, commitment to truth. But the real question is how to make permanent cultural and political adjustments that promote truth in politics. — jacobs At the core of the rift created by “alternative facts” is the circumstance that today knowledge has been almost entirely separated from actual experience. It is no longer the case that most of what peo- ple know comes fromwhat they have lived themselves or witnessed someone live. It’s become acceptable to believe something is true because a media outlet, a professor, or an opinionated friend says it is so. Sheltered behind our digital screens, we no longer have the urge to go see for ourselves, “IF WE ONLY SPEND TIME WITH PEOPLE WE AGREE WITH, WE KEEP OURSELVES SAFE FROM HAVING OUR ASSUMPTIONS SCRUTINIZED. WHAT’S AT STAKE HERE IS THE ERODING NOTION OF A BROADER, COLLECTIVE GOOD.”