The Monetization of Rage
Why We’re So Polarized (II)
Friends,
The publisher of the Oxford English Dictionary has named “rage bait” its phrase of the year.
Call it the monetization of rage. Rage has become a valuable commodity. (Always follow the money.)
A growing number of online creators are making rage bait. Their goal is to record videos, produce memes, and write posts that make other users furious: conspiracy theories, lies, combustible AI-generated video clips — whatever it takes.
The more content they create, the more engagement they get, the more they get paid.
The rage bait market is worldwide. Since X, Facebook, and Instagram pay certain content creators for posts that drive engagement, people all over the globe have a financial incentive to share material that feeds the anger of American users and will therefore get reposted.
Last week a new feature on X permitting users to see where accounts originate showed that a number of high-engagement MAGA accounts that claim to be those of patriotic Americans are in fact from Russia, Eastern Europe, India, Nigeria, Thailand, and Bangladesh.
It’s not only social media. Much the same is true of Fox News and Newsmax, as well as MSNBC. (The network that’s falling behind is the one that hasn’t taken as clear a side in the outrage wars: CNN.)
This isn’t entirely new.
Years ago, I appeared on several television programs where I debated conservatives. Once, when my opponent and I discovered we agreed on more than we disagreed, the TV producer shouted in my earbud, “More anger!”
I asked the producer during the commercial break why she wanted more anger.
“It’s why people tune in,” she said. “An angry fight attracts more viewers than a calm discussion. People stop scrolling and stay put. Advertisers want this.”
At this point I lost my temper and refused to appear on that program ever again.
Now it’s far worse, because competition for eyeballs and attention is more intense. Rewards for grabbing that attention are greater, and they go to anyone with the ability to create and sell the most outrage.
Our brains are programmed for excitement. Few events get us more excited than being juiced up with rage.
Most large media corporations are moved by shareholder returns, not the common good. This has transformed many journalists from investigators and analysts offering news to “content providers” competing for attention.
Trump’s antics have ruled the airwaves for almost a decade because his eagerness to vilify, disparage, denounce, and lie about others is a media magnet. Regardless of whether you’re appalled or thrilled by his diatribes, they’ve been rage bait.
Media executives love them.
As early as the 2016 presidential race, Leslie Moonves, CEO of CBS, confessed that the Trump phenomenon “may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS,” adding, “Who would have expected the ride we’re all having right now? The money’s rolling in … and this is going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It’s a terrible thing to say, but bring it on Donald. Keep going.”
The incentive structure in Washington follows the incentive structure in the media because the media is where people get their “news” — not only their understandings of what’s at stake but also their excitement, entertainment, and rage — which correlate directly with the performative rage we witness every day from the inhabitant of the Oval Office and his Republican lackeys.
How to make rage less profitable? Five remedies:
1. Require that news divisions be independent of the executives who represent shareholders — as they were before the 1980s.
2. Ensure that our personal information remains private, guarded from data-mining bots that flood us with custom-tailored news designed to enrage us.
3. Demand that moderation policies be reinstated and enforced on social media.
4. Stop social media corporations from paying “influencers.”
5. Have our schools emphasize critical thinking about what students hear and see in the “news,” so they’re better able to distinguish truth from fiction and real news from hype.
I’d be interested to know your ideas about how we tame the monetization of rage.
Professor Reich: as a science writer who gets a whopping double-digit readership for any of my pieces, i am disgusted by rage bait. i've read a few of those pieces and i find nothing new in them and nothing informative or explanatory -- these are all things that i strive to provide to my readers. but science and nature are, i guess, non-starters for the entire world, as is blatantly obvious to anyone who sees the catastrophe that is coming for us and is demanding immediate action on climate change.
it's like we live in a world of screaming toddlers who are hitting each other on the heads with their toy trucks as they fight over a pile of Lego. our wonderful scientific knowledge and our technology are being used to create rage amongst the world's population. i despair for ameriKKKa. i despair for the world.
“It’s why people tune in,” she said. “An angry fight attracts more viewers than a calm discussion. People stop scrolling and stay put. Advertisers want this.”
Jerry Springer was a true pioneer! I remember bringing Springer up in a poli-sci course I was taking at a D.C. area college and nearly got laughed out of classroom by the prof. Little did he seem to realize that the bad feeling about the show I had was not unfounded. It was a favorite show played on the break room TV at the mail delivery unit of the Post Office I worked at - the location where the first and last Washington Area Sniper victims fell. Little did he know that Springer was setting the political stage for what would come to pass today, 35 years into the future from that class.