Huffington Magazine Issue 69 | Page 67

Exit T WAS THE STORY people couldn’t stop sharing. Nina Davuluri’s victory at the 2014 Miss America contest set off an explosion of racist tweets, which news sites quickly bundled into stories that immediately seemed everywhere online. One group’s rage sparked another’s: On Facebook and Twitter, a cacophony of irate individuals expressed outrage at other people’s anger. A single Buzzfeed story about the racist posts, “A Lot Of People Are Very Upset That An Indian-American Woman Won The Miss America Pageant,” was shared by more than 62,000 people and has been viewed over 5.3 million times. The racist tweets, as well as the outrage they produced online, underscore an important but often ignored truth about the kind of conversation that social media encourages: The wisdom of crowds is no match for the rage of crowds. Madison Avenue taught the world that “sex sells.” But that motto needs an update in the social media age, where information travels in new ways and is carried along by different people. Online, rage rules. I hate, therefore I “like.” (And since everyone wants a “like,” I TECH HUFFINGTON 10.06.13 people aim to provoke.) “Negative comments are much more memorable and much more noticed,” observed Stanford University professor of communication Clifford Nass in an interview earlier this year. “In a world where you’re trying to get noticed, going negative is the way to go.” As a growing body of research shows, subtlety isn’t what succeeds on social networks. Anger-induc- Negative comments are much more memorable and much more noticed. In a world where you’re trying to get noticed, going negative is the way to go.” ing, emotionally-charged content spreads best, and the success of those posts may in turn be shaping the way we think and communicate with one another — lending an almost feverish pitch to our interactions online. Although social media sites claim they’re about kumbaya social connection, their design actually makes them extremely wellsuited to arousing our emotions. Many have argued precisely the opposite, saying that Facebook,