Online Argument
For this discussion I chose this online Reddit discussion about the season 46 Survivor winner. (Spoiler warning). This was the discussion I selected as I am a huge fan myself. Season finales and winner picks always cause a lot of stir. People either love or hate who the jury of previously voted off contestants choose to win a million dollars and the title of sole Survivor. With a loyal fanbase, I expected this discussion might reveal some of the negative elements of online communication we have learned about.
One issue I have with this argument is commenting on someone's real life experience as if they are characters. In this TV program, the contestants are real people who are authentically themselves on national television. Some speakers in this thread seemed to speak about the contestants as if they were merely characters. Similarly, a user called winner Kenzie's story about her upbringing, which was one of poverty and struggle, a "sob story". This is offensive and also inappropriate. Another minor but confusing element was a comment was deleted. I'm not sure why this was but it made the discussion difficult to follow in that section.
If I were to create five rules about arguing online I would say:
1) A clear frame for a discussion should be established.
2) All dialogue should be respectful, appropriate and free of hate speech.
3) Voicing opinions should be done in turns.
4) Trying to use a claim, reason and evidence helps make for legible arguments.
5) Eventually, two people may just need to agree to disagree and this is acceptable and encouraged. It is healthy to let things go and step away.

Comments
Post a Comment