Hacker News Reader

> "We"? Are you Twitter CEO or on Twitter board ?

Had a short internal argument if I should downvote you for the line above or upvote you for the rest of your comment.

Ended on upvote, but if you harvest downvotes that likely is the culprit.

I did have a point on that sentence, but didn't expand on that. Actually I did know the tone is bad. I guess the idea is that "we" as public interest conflicts with Twitter's corporate interest, but "we" can't tell Twitter to do what "we" want.

The outrage pieces are only a slice of things that engage people. People can be engaged by things that amuse and entertain, things that inform, as well and those kinds of things make their way to trending frequently.

Twitter feels more like a multi faceted vehicle, where cancel culture and outrage culture are well represented pieces of the bigger media machine.

"Right now Twitter trending topics are specifically designed as part of the big outrage machine. Many of those topics are obviously written by professional outrage activists."

Do you have proof for this? What distinguishes the writing of a professional outrage activist vs. an amateur outrage activist? What's the difference between an activist and an outrage activist? I hope it isn't whether you agree with that particular bit of outrage or not.

Without proof of your claims, is your comment outrage about alleged outrage?