It almost doesn't matter what the story was because the arguments in the comments shifted immediately to whatever personal rant, rational or not, the trolling masses wanted to bring up.
I am sure you have seen the flawed tit-for-tat pattern many times:
- A story captures public interest.
- Person A makes an argument (sometimes opinion masked as fact) not directly related to the story.
- Person B deflects Person A's argument (typically with their own opinion masked as fact) and again does not relate to the original story.
- Widespread animosity ensues.
My sarcasm aside, the concern I have is that we don't actually speak realistically about societal issues; I recognize that some folks don't want to be bothered with this because they believe that such problems only affect the people at the epicenter.
Part of the problem is that judgement quickly gets muddled by feelings. Even an eyewitness account of events might be rejected because of mistrust and a desire to stick one's own established opinions.
This is an element of what I call an "all-or-nothing" belief system. Simply put, it is a conceit that anything that is a boon for one person or group is a detriment for another person or group. Rigid, adamant thinking such as this does not match reality though. Worse, this can lead to a belief that everything about a person or group is negative while one's own actions or collective group is infallible and beyond reproach (this is not to imply that affirmed criminals deserve a pass but rather their actions are not the measure of an entire people).
So what was this apparently polarizing story that immersed my morning in derogatory opinions?
Astute readers might try to guess but I think the trolls have been fed enough for one day.