I don’t even know what to call the conservative propaganda tools at this point. They’re like dopamine buttons for the most susceptible people. The only thing I know to compare it to are the people I knew who got addicted to WoW in like 2008 and would play for 30 hours straight.
I’ve seen it offline and in person: they are hooked. Some Reddit-style pedantic may get upset if I use the term addicted but as an external observer it does look like actual addiction. Fox News (or OAN or the like) has to be on a big screen and it has to be blasting at high volume or they seem visibly uneasy and shaken and if someone so much as asks for the volume to go down they get actually genuinely enraged.
“YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE FACTS, SNOWFLAKE? ARE YOU TRIGGERED?” -said by a 50+ year old man.
Dr. Drew is a chud so fuck him, but a long time ago I used to listen to Love Line. I really liked how Drew would talk about addiction. Someone would ask if something was an addiction or not. He would ask “is it having negative consequences in your life?” If it’s not having negative consequences, then does it really matter if it’s an addiction or not? Likewise if someone isn’t traditionally considered an addiction but it’s having negative consequences, then that’s where the problem is.
Like for me, I know I’m addicted to coffee. But tbh it isn’t really causing any negative effects in my life - I really do enjoy a morning coffee, I feel like it centers me - so I don’t really sweat it. Meanwhile even if someone isn’t “addicted” to Facebook in a conventional sense, if it’s causing negative effects in their life it’s a serious problem.
I don’t even know what to call the conservative propaganda tools at this point. They’re like dopamine buttons for the most susceptible people. The only thing I know to compare it to are the people I knew who got addicted to WoW in like 2008 and would play for 30 hours straight.
I’ve seen it offline and in person: they are hooked. Some Reddit-style pedantic may get upset if I use the term addicted but as an external observer it does look like actual addiction. Fox News (or OAN or the like) has to be on a big screen and it has to be blasting at high volume or they seem visibly uneasy and shaken and if someone so much as asks for the volume to go down they get actually genuinely enraged.
“YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE FACTS, SNOWFLAKE? ARE YOU TRIGGERED?” -said by a 50+ year old man.
Dr. Drew is a chud so fuck him, but a long time ago I used to listen to Love Line. I really liked how Drew would talk about addiction. Someone would ask if something was an addiction or not. He would ask “is it having negative consequences in your life?” If it’s not having negative consequences, then does it really matter if it’s an addiction or not? Likewise if someone isn’t traditionally considered an addiction but it’s having negative consequences, then that’s where the problem is.
Like for me, I know I’m addicted to coffee. But tbh it isn’t really causing any negative effects in my life - I really do enjoy a morning coffee, I feel like it centers me - so I don’t really sweat it. Meanwhile even if someone isn’t “addicted” to Facebook in a conventional sense, if it’s causing negative effects in their life it’s a serious problem.