Other outlets chase what’s “already trending,” mistaking algorithmic amplification for genuine public concern. This creates a feedback loop: outrage drives coverage, coverage drives politics, politics produces more outrage.
Other outlets chase what’s “already trending,” mistaking algorithmic amplification for genuine public concern. This creates a feedback loop: outrage drives coverage, coverage drives politics, politics produces more outrage.
The result is institutional capture. Parties that once held the centre now chase visibility within an outrage-driven system. “Centrist realism” isn’t moderation, it’s accommodation to a discourse already warped.
I really think when one looks at what you have described the key point is the establishment (which of course includes mainstream media) just perpetuates a system that maintains the status quo. And happily so for them.
So when people say “elections are won from the centre,” they ignore the fact the centre has been redefined by an engagement-first information system. The real contest is between who can master disordered discourse, and democracy slides into authoritarianism.
I'm not sure your implicit assumption (that either right or left, with the proper strategy, can drive the narrative and succeed in elections) is correct. We're in a very alt-right moment, starting when Obama was elected and propelled by pandemic restrictions. I'm not sure the left can win much now.
Maybe my view here is shaped by my own social media consumption, but everywhere I look these days, I see horrific, gleeful anti-immigrant, anti-trans, pro "traditional" wife, anti-birth control pile-ons. Racists see no need for more Unite the Right rallies, because they've taken over the gov't.
Given all of that, I don't think it's as easy as saying, "Get control of the algorithmic narrative, drive engagement, and the left starts winning elections again." I think it's gonna take a *lot* more than that. It took me *three* posts to say this?!? Sorry, lol [/fin].
I discuss what's driving that below. The short version is that first MAGA should be seen as a coalition of disordered counterpublics, not a single movement bsky.app/profile/elio...
Thx for this. I'll finish watching the episode later today. Yes, #MAGA, like most big movements, is a coalition of smaller factions. Trump's got a pretty good grip on them all, tho, as we see with Epstein conspiracy theorists, who've been beaten down to where the "Civil War" is over, and they lost.
It's worth thinking about Tulsi Gabbard in this context, especially regarding the Iran strikes and her claims of Obama interfering with the election. It's a clear demonstration of loyalty tests within that coalition.
Centre wins by a country mile in Australia
Agree. And as we saw in 2019, elections aren't won from the centre (or left or right) - they're won by coalitions. Unless 🇬🇧 left & centre can muster an organised coalition to beat Oswald Farage-Jenrick coalition in 2029, that disorganised discourse will bring fascism to 🇬🇧 via same route as 1933 🇩🇪.
Sadly, I see little sign of such cooperation.