Has Twitter become as addictive as others?
In a new chapter in the Twitter saga… Elon Musk’s arrival has sparked comments and fears… Everyone – and primarily its most jaded users who crave the glory to challenge its new owner – is reacting, overreacting.. A minister to Musk’s remarks in response, “Suspending all activity on Twitter until further notice”…
We would like to demonstrate with satire that there is no power, we would not go otherwise. The life of the social network worries us more than the martial law in our country. In politics 2.0 had an organizing function online functioning communities offline. Simply use screens to manage field campaigns. The opposite happened with Twitter. Exposing one’s self, one’s own ideas, leads to a kind of isolation under the ever-increasing public gaze.
Addicted to Twitter?
Addiction is always a meeting of the individual, the personal and social context, and the product. Here, the product is not a molecule, but a micro-blogging site. Addiction is a harmful attachment to a molecule or activity. In this case, let’s assume that the damage is also harmful to public debate and democracy.
Irony becomes the scorched earth of political life.
Now, video game addiction disorders are under medical scrutiny. The same is true for long-term gambling addiction.Twitter addict Donald J.Trump came up with a very interesting topic. Journalists and political scientists often repeat the context of his tweets in bursts. In particular, we know that he tweets a lot in the morning, after waking up and in front of the TV. Getting kicked out of a social network is experienced as a serious attack on everyone’s freedom.
We remember the “crisis” (with lots of quotation marks) about the expulsion of Jan Messihan from this network. Exile more or less corresponds to attempted social destruction in the minds of many. Proof that Twitter is addictive, Jean Messiha is back as soon as possible!
How can you live without tweeting?
Therefore, Twitter is not a “normal” media. Neither newspaper nor television. This is not an Instagram-type social network (where photos are posted), in short, “normal” 2.0. Twitter is separate. It prompts an immediate reaction “before reflection”. There is an obvious form of cruelty inherent in Twitter. Famous criminologist Alain Bauer said the following about the stabbings: “From now on we will plant as we tweet.” Humility, sparkle, dazzling feedback and – presto! – tweet.
The emission of a tweet – in any relationship – is (in the opinion of the tweeter rather than the reader) evidence of a person’s social presence. All day and even night, the political tweeter needs material to relieve his existential angst. Any topic is good for communication. Obviously, an attack (#JeSuisPetaouchnok) or the death of an individual (#RIPJohnny) allows for a flood of tweets to exist. Adding some originality to it is a must to stand out, and sometimes an hour of reluctance can set a tweet apart from the rest. Twitter addiction undermines the immune defenses of self-esteem.
Twitter succeeds in persuading the user that it exists politically in the media.
During the 2011-2012 primary campaign, “twittos” brought themselves onto the political stage. They are often anonymous, although they are rarely forced to fear their commitments professionally, often without a photo of them on their profile, although they do not suffer from too naughty looks, some have become real personalities. Each team was excited to tweet as much as possible to defend their candidate in front of an audience consisting almost exclusively of Paris press newsrooms.
We comment on an elected official’s opinion of the moment, very rarely about his balance or political vision. Irony becomes the scorched earth of political life.
If Twitter is an addictive, highly addictive and highly destructive app, it has some product-like features, crack . By making everyone’s facts, words, gestures, and hidden intentions hyper-public, Twitter paradoxically disconnects its victim from a real social bond, just as it excludes the last person from socialism. The co-existence of seeking media coverage, twitter recognition harms the individual and reproduces itself in the political and social structure, causing democracy.
Twitter succeeds in convincing the user that it exists mediatically, politically; it is a powerful existential booster of everyday life, and especially everyday life that seeks meaning. That said, there is a Twitter community and there is indeed an initial cost to leaving it.
It is also a form of political alienation and abdication before the march of the world.
The inventory of tweets from our parliamentarians (all trends combined) is amazing: condolences, warm reactions during the session, signs of solidarity with the cause of the day, reflections or unthinkable comparisons. Those who try to dissuade a politician or journalist from tweeting too much are gnashing their teeth against the talk of an addict (sports lottery or whatever).
There’s an existential need for twitto’s tweet to make a point: how many are congratulating Joe Biden on his election or writing 280 funny signs to send condolences to Windsor? Interference topics follow trends on Twitter. What politician can respond to a human tragedy with a 200-character tweet without seeming borderline obscene? Most actually.
Autointoxication
Twitter believes that the number of subscribers is capital. To abandon 10,000 followers would be to abandon a political treasure. Expressing oneself in 280 characters or 140 on any given subject betrays an abandonment of nuance, an inner journey towards the progressive brutalization of one’s writing and thought. It is also a form of political alienation and abdication before the march of the world.
Democracy would benefit from addressing the Twitter thread rather than Musk, the head of Twitter.
It’s bullying on Twitter online but you can soak it offline. Our caged pleasures are impossible to fathom: snide twitts (“Like that at PLS, etc., etc.) or abusive aggression never translate physically. If Twitter were a simple launch of Tamagotchi, one would think that nothing bad would come of it. Therefore, two realities coexist on Twitter: on the one hand, the growing irrelevance of its compulsive following, and on the other, its tendency to be increasingly brutal in its expressions.
Quitting Twitter when you have 10,000 or 20,000 followers is not a test of survival. Life doesn’t change. It is enough to understand that his public activity (if necessary) is stronger by writing texts than by attacking the whole world with judgmental, incompetent and poorly written statements. Even for an elected official, there is no “obligation to be on Twitter.” It is a mistake to think that you have to be on Twitter at all costs to play politics.
What Twitter instills in the minds of our politicians leads them to compulsive and destructive use. Democracy would benefit from addressing the Twitter thread rather than Musk, the head of Twitter. The height of the sandman hoax: inciting a referendum on Twitter’s direction and convincing the user that the power is in his hands.
