Psychology Today blog - The Dark Side of Social Media Activism in Science, 2019, S. Camarata

Discussion in 'Psychosomatic news - ME/CFS and Long Covid' started by Andy, Jul 23, 2019.

  1. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    22,791
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    Moved from this thread

    Thought this was posted here already but I can't find it.

    www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-intuitive-parent/201907/the-dark-side-social-media-activism-in-science

    The reference in the quote is to the Reuters article.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 23, 2019
    Woolie, Simon M, Annamaria and 19 others like this.
  2. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,602
    That was a major research effort. How long does it take to read Kate Kelland's article uncritically?
     
    Woolie, Annamaria, inox and 10 others like this.
  3. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    14,647
    Location:
    London, UK
    I have posted a comment that seems to have gone up - but I guess might be taken down!
     
  4. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    9,830
    Location:
    UK
    Superb.
    Just in case
     
  5. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    54,739
    Location:
    UK
    Thank you. Excellent comment. I didn't see it until after I'd written a comment too.
    Here's mine, in case it gets taken down.
     
    Woolie, Atle, Marit @memhj and 52 others like this.
  6. James Morris-Lent

    James Morris-Lent Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    903
    Location:
    United States
    The psychology behind the writing of this latest piece seems the same as when any Joe becomes riled up enough to write some misbegotten diatribe after being duped by a Facebook fake news article.

    The author worries about the seething masses on social media when he himself appears to be operating from the same sort of prejudicial tribalistic pique that he imagines motivates these straw men.

    This sort of goonishness is one of the most effective ways to erode public trust in scientific institutions and empower brazen bullishitters on the outside and inside of those institutions.
     
  7. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    14,647
    Location:
    London, UK
    I think that is a little unfair on Peter Sellars, Spike Milligan and Harry Secombe.
     
    Graham, Annamaria, Simon M and 22 others like this.
  8. James Morris-Lent

    James Morris-Lent Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    903
    Location:
    United States
    Whoever they are, I'm sure they don't deserve to implicated!
     
  9. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    14,647
    Location:
    London, UK
    Blasphemy
     
    Hutan, Blueskytoo, Simon M and 16 others like this.
  10. MSEsperanza

    MSEsperanza Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,917
    Location:
    betwixt and between
  11. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    54,739
    Location:
    UK
    Excellent comment by @Michiel Tack.

     
    Woolie, Hutan, Graham and 42 others like this.
  12. Mithriel

    Mithriel Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,816
    Excellent comment from you too Trish. So glad we have such articulate people explaining our problems to the wider world.
     
    Hutan, Annamaria, inox and 33 others like this.
  13. RuthT

    RuthT Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    204
    Gosh, the responses posted to ‘answer’ or respond to critiques of the article are very poor indeed.
     
    Hutan, Graham, Annamaria and 16 others like this.
  14. Peter Trewhitt

    Peter Trewhitt Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,961
    The is standard fare. The defences by the PACE apologists have always been poor, I guess because they are attempts at defending the indefensible.
     
  15. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,362
    Location:
    Canada
    Even by the usual standards, this is lazy and poorly researched. The author is basically doing the equivalent of reviewing the movie based on watching the first half of the trailer. I don't know why people feel the need to display their misunderstanding of the situation this way.

    This belongs more in politics than science. The crux of whatever is being argued here is: there are "others". Unseen and working in the shadows, "others" are doing bad, though unspecified, things. Those things only amount to a handful of tweets that essentially criticize how disastrous the impact has been, essentially mocking us for objecting to informed consent and scientific rigor having being waived off entirely. But there is innuendo of more. More what? BAD THINGS!

    However here "leaders" are mentioned and I'd really like for it to be spelled who those "leaders" are supposed to be. Usually it's an indistinct "activists" but here it's pointing fingers in a general direction, with the intent of blaming someone without naming them. Cowardice.

    To borrow a famous quip: shallow and pedantic.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2019
  16. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,362
    Location:
    Canada
    I particularly love that they essentially amount to "those refutations are wrong because I don't like them", literally the claim being made against all evidence. It's all so lazy and transparent.
     
  17. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    14,647
    Location:
    London, UK
    I was going to post under the heading:

    Thank you troll Jim O'Brien MD for illustrating Jimells point perfectly

    but I decided that trolls are best not fed.

    I might have gone on to write:

    Thank you troll Jim O'Brien MD for illustrating Jimells point perfectly

    Think about it for a minute.

    Is it your clinic policy to treat people with cluster B behaviour and classic projection by telling them they are trolls? You are an MD? Did you ever hear of respect or compassion? And what if your pet theories are wrong?

    If your post was nothing to do with ME then would one not expect a doctor to have the tact not to put that sort of comment on a blog about ME on a professional psychology site?

    If psychiatrists have this level of problem with negative transference (that's a code word for not liking people) with people who seem irrational online how do they cope in the clinic where most of the patients are irrational. Do they tell them they are hateful trolls. One dreads to think.

    This guy is such a caricature I think he is best left to stew in his own juice.
     
    Sarah94, Annamaria, Atle and 20 others like this.
  18. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    14,647
    Location:
    London, UK
    Well done that troll jimells
     
  19. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,390
    Very nice post by someone:
     
    Woolie, Marit @memhj, Hutan and 32 others like this.
  20. NelliePledge

    NelliePledge Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    14,457
    Location:
    UK West Midlands
    I think the comments will be rather enlightening to some of the Psychology Today readership so well done all.
     
    Hutan, Annamaria, Lisa108 and 21 others like this.

Share This Page