We live in the present emotionally; physically; and, sometimes to our detriment, intellectually. We enjoy sharing our feelings and do so quite naturally. In doing so, we often get validation, support, and recognition or occasionally refutation and rejection. On the job, we share at the table, where there is generally an “elder” who will provide, as needed, some wisdom; sometimes we get just the raise of an eyebrow.
Firefighters are just as the society is around us. We are not monolithic—not in politics, religion, or worldview. We share our emotions, thoughts, and feelings, often hoping to receive validation of our opinion or position. Today, what we do at the kitchen table many of us also do electronically on social media platforms. There, they call it “virtue signaling”; at the table, we call it “shooting the bull.”
The electronic side of it is interesting. Pew Research recently released a report that showed that 10 percent of all the Twitter users create 80 percent of the tweets. Pew reported, “About 80 percent of all tweets from U.S. Twitter users come from just 10 percent of users. These users tweet 138 times per month while the median Twitter user only tweets twice per month.”
Pew also profiled the 10 percent as “predominantly female, democrat, tweeting about politics, believe black people are treated less fairly than white people, think immigrants strengthen the country, and it is tougher for women to get ahead.”
We have social media firefighters, and although they may not fit the profile exactly, it may pan out that 10 percent produce 80 percent of the content. Now to be clear, virtue signaling is in the eye of the beholder. If you choose to stand up and be counted as a supporter of whatever is in with the “whatever” group, you can expect the “whatever” crowd to rally to your side and lift you up as a good person and worthy human. Conversely, if you choose to express an opinion not held by the “whatever” group, let’s call them the “whenever” group, the whenevers will lift you up and the whatevers will condemn you.
Where it gets a little sporty is when we start ascribing motives to someone or some group based on what “we” think they are thinking. We all do it—I, you, all of us. It is human nature. The difference is that today we do it on global electronic platforms that will outlive us and will potentially be accessed by anyone at any time.
Recently, a story was published regarding an innovation that was albeit a little push with regard to the technology and its potential to be implemented industrywide anytime soon. But, it was an interesting idea and not totally crazy or without merit. It was one of those stories about which most of us would have said, “Uh, I don’t know, but maybe,” or we would have shared it among a few other firefighters around the kitchen table and asked, “Wadda ya think?”
Well, that innovation article got the attention of a friend who experienced a very angry reaction to it according to his tweet. He was enraged that anyone could possibly believe such a thing had merit. He further indicated he was personally offended that anyone would be so insolent as to upset him and his serene morning with such drivel that he clearly found ludicrous and intolerable. It was inexcusable that such a thing be published, and he was not going to stand for it.
In no time at all, other members of the “whatever” crowd joined in, expressing to my friend what a wonderful person he was for his intolerance and superiority and how they felt the same way. No one is going to say or think anything we don’t like in this fire service, by golly. Heresy will not be tolerated; there will be an inquisition.
Well, maybe not quite that hyperbolic, but you get the picture. All of them, absolutely all of them, are fine people, really fine people; actually, they are friends of mine. The kitchen table is now an electronic table; some days, when we are having a bad hair day, we go off. There should be an electronic table elder who flashes a “raised eyebrow,” warning when we post a really knucklehead post, and who gives us the chance to count to 10 and delete it.
And, to be clear, being upset about a product is no big deal. It is an inanimate object; it has no feelings, but the person who designed it does, and this is where we need to be careful in ascribing motive or intent. Ernest Hemingway nailed it when he shared this wisdom with us: “There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow men. True nobility lies in being superior to your former self.”
To be fair, my friend was just shooting the bull; unfortunately, he was doing it electronically, which is where it gets kind of weird. We can’t see one another’s faces, we don’t have a chance to reply in real time, and we are limited to 280 characters. If you don’t know my friend, you would take it entirely the wrong way. He’s a good guy; he’s just very loud, highly sarcastic, and sometimes highly reactionary.
Hopefully, as we move through this age of electronic immediate communication, we get more elegant in how we handle it. With the advent of new platforms like Parler, things might change. It will be interesting to see if folks like Larry Sanger and his “Declaration of Digital Independence” movement can get any traction.
If he is successful, we might finally have as a place what John Stuart Mill put in his essay “Liberty”—an electronic platform that respects “the free marketplace of ideas.” Maybe it will be an electronic table with friends, fellow firefighters, and an occasional raised eyebrow.
MORE BOBBY HALTON
