The endgames of bad faith communication
I think that most social media is increasing the power of bad faith compared to good faith actors.
Normal perspective versus an extreme perspective then I fear that the more normal perspective people often has a more diverse situation with many other sources and influences.<p>A less extreme person arguing in good faith probably has many other things in his/her life to worry about, like children/parents/work/neighbours etc.<p>While bad faith actors often have much less distractions, and can more easily afford to just keep the point going. I think a bad faith actor will relative easy force out more moderate/normal people out of the forum or conversation thread.
Why keep going, if you got a family and work and .. to take cary about, and arguing in good faith will be hard to get anywhere good ?<p>I think this give a much bigger loudspeaker to people with more extrem views, and help shut up people with more moderate positions.
I suspect the the setup of social media and the tools they use, and the tools within forums influence this.<p>Engagement is probably increased if such extreme versus moderate is argued, and I think the more extreme position win is likely increasing income for social media.