{"id":41853,"date":"2018-03-27T06:00:58","date_gmt":"2018-03-27T10:00:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/shamusyoung.com\/twentysidedtale\/?p=41853"},"modified":"2018-03-30T12:31:32","modified_gmt":"2018-03-30T16:31:32","slug":"this-game-is-bad-for-you","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shamusyoung.com\/twentysidedtale\/?p=41853","title":{"rendered":"This Game is Bad for You"},"content":{"rendered":"

I’ve wanted to write about this for a long time. In fact, I did write about this a long time ago. This essay has been sitting in the drafts folder for over a year. I keep meaning to publish it, but then I chicken out. This has been in my “rainy day content” queue for a while nowI’m not suddenly braver today, I’m just out of regular content.<\/span>.<\/p>\n

See, the point I want to make has the stench of moral panic<\/a> about it, and I hate, HATE moral panics. I hate when people start whining about how some awesome new thing is killing us, or corrupting our children, or problematic, or whatever. I’ve lived through periods where middle-aged dunces got themselves worked up over Dungeons and Dragons being Satanic. Rock and Roll is turning teens into hedonists. Videogames are “Murder Simulators”. Smartphones are giving us ear cancer and making us antisocial. I know how obnoxious it is when old people get worked up about New Things.<\/p>\n

And yet here I am, 46 years old and wringing my hands over a New Thing. <\/p>\n

I don’t want to start a moral panic over this. Instead let’s call it a Moral… “Unease”? “Mild worry”? “It might be good to keep an eye on this”? Whatever. I want to worry about a new thing but I want to do it in a chill and non-confrontational way.<\/p>\n

The point is, there’s a game everyone is playing today and it really is bad for you. Having played this game for eight years I can tell you first-hand that it really does impact the way people behave and perceive each other. And I’m not talking about in-game behavior, here. I’m talking about real, lasting consequences in the real world. I’m talking about a game that can actually change the way you see other human beings, and how you treat them. It’s a game that’s genuinely harmful and continues to impact your thoughts and behavior, even after you stop playing it.<\/p>\n

The game is Twitter.<\/p>\n

“But Shamus, Twitter isn’t a game!”<\/p>\n

Right, right. I mean obviously it’s not an actual<\/em> game. But hear me out.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The Mechanics of Twitter<\/h3>\n

Welcome to Twitter. Here's a ginormous bandwidth-sucking stock photo of smiling millennials that has nothing to do with the service.<\/div>
Welcome to Twitter. Here's a ginormous bandwidth-sucking stock photo of smiling millennials that has nothing to do with the service.<\/div><\/p>\n

Twitter isn’t a game, but it does have some game-like mechanics. It has a system of positive and negative feedback, and it has an implicit goal. It rewards certain behaviors and punishes others, and this feedback drives behavior. Just like the score in Asteroids tells you your goal is to kill ships and asteroids – and not simply to fly around in circles dodging stuff forever – the mechanics of Twitter push you into behaviors you might never otherwise engage in. They also intensify the existing social rewards for negative behaviors. While not part of the deliberate design of the system, these behaviors are actually kind of insidious.<\/p>\n

On Twitter, followers and re-tweets are your reward currency. Just as Pac-Man encourages you to eat stuff to accrue points, Twitter encourages you to say things that others will want to repeat, with the ultimate goal of growing your followers.<\/p>\n

On paper, this sounds like a brilliant system for encouraging people to say healthy, intelligent, witty, or clever things. If I’d never used Twitter myself, I would incorrectly predict that this would create a system to reward positive behavior and discourage negative behavior. In theory, it sounds like a system that would create harmony and encourage understanding. <\/p>\n

And to limited extent, it does. If you say things that are negative, obvious, stupid, or obnoxious, people aren’t likely to share your thoughts. The system is a lot of fun and works basically as intended… <\/p>\n

Until you introduce politics.<\/em><\/p>\n

I'm sure blue cheated. I mean, the only other way he could win is if he was better than red, and that's impossible. I've been cheering for red for years!<\/div>
I'm sure blue cheated. I mean, the only other way he could win is if he was better than red, and that's impossible. I've been cheering for red for years!<\/div><\/p>\n

And just to be clear: When I say “politics”, I’m talking about partisan politics. Red v. Blue. Democrats vs. Republicans. (Or whatever the teams are called in your area.) Right vs. Left. Commies vs. Capitalists. Us. vs THEM. Good guys vs. bad guys. <\/p>\n

Let’s say there are two factions on Twitter who are embroiled in a long-standing cultural debate: the Purple Team and the Yellow Team. They’re not fighting about which Pokémon is best, or the pronunciation of gifFor technical reasons, it’s actually pronounced “Jiggity-jeff”.<\/span>. They’re fighting about real-world political stuff that’s deeply personal. <\/p>\n

I’m sure you’re already aware of the pull in Twitter towards groupthink. That’s where you’ve got two warring factions. Let’s say we (everyone on this site) is a member of the Purple Party. One day I say something snarky about Yellows and some of them unfollow me, while Purples retweet the joke and I get more Purple followers. If I play to one side like this then I’ll get more followers. More retweets. More engagement. In the game of Twitter, my “score” goes up. <\/p>\n

Over time, I become a Purple talking mostly to other Purples about how stupid Yellows are. You know this one, right? Lots of people have noticed this already. <\/p>\n

So the mechanics of Twitter pull us towards groupthink. That’s bad, but lots of sites do that. At this point a lot of people are going to link to this video by C.G.P. Grey about anger germs:<\/p>\n