Just When I Thought I Was Out, They Pull Me Back In
Why the internet makes us so angry we can't stay away from it
I knew better, but I recently left a comment on a popular writer's Substack post. The writer and the topic don't really matter. What matters is that, as a result of that initial comment, I spent the rest of the day and evening arguing furiously with strangers on the internet.
Why? Why do I and many thousands of other people feel so compelled to participate in these unproductive virtual conflicts, despite knowing full well that they accomplish nothing other than upsetting ourselves (and maybe some anonymous strangers)?
I looked into it, and neuroscience has a few explanations.
The Diathesis-Stress Model
Diathesis is a fancy word for “tendency,” and the Diathesis-Stress Model is actually a lot more straightforward than it sounds. It simply theorizes that whether and how someone develops a psychological disorder depends both on that individual’s diathesis for it and the stressful events that trigger it. So, for example, if you have a tendency for depression, you might be okay until you experience a painful breakup or the death of a loved one. At that point, you would suffer more and longer-lasting depression than someone who went through the same experience, but did not have the same diathesis.
A diathesis can be for chronic conditions like depression, or acute issues like emotional reactivity. This, in part, explains why some people feel such a strong compulsion to argue on the internet while others do not. Reading a comment that expresses a point of view we believe is factually or ethically wrong is a stressor. But that stressor triggers the impulse to ignore our other obligations in order to type furiously on the computer keyboard for as long as it takes to make our point depends on our diathesis for emotional reactivity.
The HPA Axis
The term “emotional reactivity” may evoke an image (or memory) of someone “blowing up” or “flying off the handle.” Those simple terms actually describe a complex sequence of events happening inside the brain.
Neuroscientists often use the term “HPA Axis” to refer to the stress-response mechanism. H is for hypothalamus, P is for pituitary gland, and A is is for adrenal cortex. Together, these three structures within the endocrine system release hormones that influence the levels of important neurotransmitters within the brain. In other words, they control how upset we get.
The more sensitive a person’s HPA axis is, the more likely they are to react strongly to stressors. This sensitivity is governed by a variety of factors, including genetic predisposition, thought patterns, the presence of external stressors, and lifestyle factors like hunger and lack of sleep. This is why, if you’re “already having a bad day,” you’re much more likely to respond angrily to an internet comment than if you were feeling cheerful, rested, and relaxed.
Our Stone Age Brains
The size and structure of the human brain stopped changing around 300,000 years ago. So, while the external trappings of our lives may look different, what happens between our ears is stuck in the Stone Age. To our Paleolithic amygdala, reading an adversarial internet comment feels just like an unknown cave dweller appearing out of nowhere and shouting at us. It’s an attack, and our survival may depend on how we respond.
The way we respond to perceived threats used to be called “the fight or flight response.” This has expanded to “fight, flight, freeze, fawn,” which is less catchy, but a more accurate summary of the range of responses.
Fight - When someone comes at you with “fighting words” on the internet, it may feel like an attack, but there’s (usually) no physical danger. Therefore, we often feel emboldened to respond with a high degree of aggression (especially if responding anonymously).
Flight - In the real world, the safest response to an attack is often to run away. On the internet, this is summarized by the advice, “Don’t feed the troll.” Just click away, keep scrolling, and recognize that the angry voice in your head is not leading you into a fight with any worthwhile outcome.
Freeze - This is a common response to real-life trauma, but less common on the internet. However, if you see a truly horrifying or aggressive piece of content, it can “stop you in your tracks,” which would be analogous to the Freeze response.
Fawn (AKA Flop or Friend) - In some cases, placating or adopting a submissive posture to an enemy can be the safest course of action. It’s not uncommon to see writers take this approach toward aggressive commenters.
What’s the Answer?
Because our ancient brains don’t really grasp the difference between a real experience and an experience mediated by technology, the research-based suggestions for dealing with internet-based issues are largely the same as those for dealing with real-world issues.
Mindfulness Practice
Mindfulness sounds simple: Focus your attention on something neutral and keep it there. However, this means that instead of engaging with your thoughts and feelings, you have to simply observe them as they come and go. As Shakespeare would say, ay, there’s the rub.
No, it's not easy, but mindfulness is as beneficial as it is challenging. Researchers have consistently found that practicing mindfulness meditation techniques can reduce emotional reactivity by mitigating over-sensitivity of the HPA axis. In other words, it trains the brain to stay calm longer, and to return to a calm state more quickly. If there’s a magic bullet for over-reacting, mindfulness is it.
Implementation Intentions
It is a cruel trick of biology that we can’t solve a problem while we’re upset about it. That’s because when we experience a stress response, our body diverts resources towards survival mechanisms (like the muscles we would use to fight or run away), and away from the parts of our brain that we would use to resolve whatever is causing the stress.
In short, stress makes us stupid, and the more stressed we are, the more stupid we get. An implementation intention takes this stupidity into consideration by encouraging us to do the problem-solving ahead of time. Formulated as a simple “if-then” statement, an implementation intention is a decision you make while you’re calm, in anticipation of a future trigger. “If I read a comment on the internet that upsets me, I will take a deep breath and close the browser window. I will not respond.” This way, when you experience the trigger, you don’t have to figure out what to do, you just have to follow the plan you made earlier.
Obviously, this takes commitment, consistency, and practice, but it can be effective both in reducing the intensity of emotional response, and in mitigating the potential damage caused by acting unwisely in the heat of the moment.
ACT
ACT - Acceptance and Commitment Therapy - is a modern take on the philosophy of Stoicism, which taught that distress is rooted more in our interpretation of reality than in reality itself.
The Acceptance part of ACT is the idea that we should accept our thoughts and feelings rather than viewing them as absolute truths or trying to change them. By doing so, we reduce their power over our actions.
The Commitment part of ACT is the recommendation that we commit to values-based behavior, even when experiencing discomfort. This entails figuring out what our core principles and beliefs are, and then making the personal decision to act according to those principles, no matter what.
Test Time
Mindfulness, implementation intentions, and ACT are all solid approaches, and they play well together. After doing the research to write this blog post, I actually feel a little better about my chances of not getting provoked into responding the next time I see some egregiously false comment on the internet.
I’ll test these techniques for a few months and see how it goes. If you’ve tried any of them yourself, leave a comment and let me know how it went for you.
Ah, but Alex, yer too hard on yerself by half. First, as ya know, I know the particular bit of sand that got in yer eye an' it got in "meine" too, 'cept I see it all a mite differently.
Offa the top, this was not some trivial piffle postin' ya responded to--it was something that STRUCK a chord--that resonated! Sure we can even enjoy debates 'bout the piffle from time to time, when it strikes us, when time permits, but this was not piffle--it was a fairly major break in the crucible that's been set a'boil with molten metals for quite some time--we've all watched it bubble/trouble--but only a few of us seem ta have the chutzpah ta cheer on a rare truth, KNOWIN' the haters'll come after us like ants to the picnic table.
It was a heretofore unspoken "dare ya" from the writer--who--bless 'im--named names! the names of the journalistic "heroes" whose laurels depend on one-sided biased "group think" that had never been much challenged...
I think ya "did good" an' was glad ta see ya out there! Havin' time in yer life where something in yer brain sez fight this time--don't fly away from this one--is human an' soitenly not needin' to be written off as weakness when speakin' up for the underdog is a strength! (Wuther or not the underdawg is you--or not).
Clearly per my Stack moniker I'mma "cheerin' section" for the "heterodox" an' it drops mah jaw ta think how few supporters CJ had in that postin'--he went out onna limb an' lost subscribers an' got razzed, heckled, insulted an' you now berate yerself for chimin' in? What CJ an' JUST a SMALL handful of us were sayin' was once not heterodox nor heresy -- but now it is in the pc world of "troothers" so bein' an articulate an' vocal voice of dissent is makin' ya kick yerself 'bout it now? Don't!
Speakin' up is never for naught if there are some listeners (however quiet) who may be swayed--I've swayed a few myself--'specially if they were already leanin' a bit on the fulcrum.
That dawg day afternoon fight (politely) shoutin' at the hard-of-hearin' may have "sucked in" the better part of a day of battle it's true--yet even if no battle was "won" outright yer pickin' up a literary hammer (that's how vere supposed ta fight, no?)--was a WIN for the otherwise silent peanut gallery (love me a mixed-up metaphor but it's late lol).
Speakin' up (imho) is good fer the soul (...er yer nishuma too). AND it's part of not bein' passive, not just lettin' sly words git by.
Two words should come ta mine: Martin Niemoller (the prophetic Pastor!)
I grew up with an important D acronym--DSD--"Do sumthin' dummy" followed by "don't just stand there." Someone on the subway needs help, don't wait for the other guy--git the MTA, call 911, DSD! When my girls were small I tested all painted toys for lead an' once--one came back positive--I could'a thrown it out an' just let it go but no.. DSD in me spoke up, I called the company an' sent 'em my results--there was eventually a recall (long story but I even got involved with a safety group as a result). So laundry can wait, speakin' up when an opportunity presents itself an' few others will be there ta do the job--it's a mitzvah--a good deed. (imho)
So zen away if that brings ya more peace (by all means be mindful!), but I prefer goin "Maccabee" on the haters cuz if everyone takes such aspersions lyin' down--the consensus will be "assumed" as fact.
So imho, yer efforts need not be ah-nay-pad-thai-oh'my'd away or "mindfully" dismissed or even kumbaya'd inta the cornfield (Charles Einstein is one good at that trick)... I mean they could be, it's yer cherce--an' mebbe ya'd sleep easier--but pas moi, I cain't "dormir sure mes deux oreilles" one bit unless I "DSD" an' say something if I see hate and lies unchallenged.
Of COURSE we do Triage--that particular popular Stack was a good place to "sing off key" whereas doin' the same on an empty corner at midnight might indeed be a waste of time (not ta mention an invitation ta get mugged lol) BUT speakin' out when nobody else is doin so--bein' that one voice (okay there were mebbe 4 of us outta what, 100?) ain't carryin' coals ta Newcastle!
IMHO ya done good "kid" (however long in the tooth we might be ha ha ...) and...here's why:
1. the issue was not petty as ya know--stayin' silent is not a virtue...
2. there are always SOME that listen--they do not always "like" or respond--but they do read down the line... SO... if there is no well-put dissent they may only find consensus... BUT I wanna be there for those listeners, however few or many, who are lookin' for that glimmer of dissent--lookin' for someone who does not join the "gang" (or gang up) and lookin' ta hear what they say-- So, imho, it's really for them we shout out, not for the already "convinced" or the true "haters."
3. These stacks (an' similar sites with comments sections )stand in testament to a moment in time--a moment where many ganged up, agreed, said gawd awful stuff, or went silent. "Our" words that counter bear witness (until Substack archives are destroyed at least...)
4. Makin' the Stack a Democratic Republic vs a Majority-Rules Democracy--is also a good idear! I practice it daily!
5. Without a few of us nudnicks speakin' up--there would have been NO VOICES offerin' another side of the issues--If not us, then WHO?
I find it funny that the Diathesis-Stress Model is an acronym for the DSM! (which as a diagnostic model or compendium is fulla some truths an' much bunkum--has more made-up diagnoses & syndromes than carter's got liver pills--which I guess were abundant at the time!) -- this ain't ta say Diathesis-Stress ain't "legit" but just that there are a whole lotta things that made ta sound "abby normal" that are not only normal but noble! As long as there's a dx for folks that "follow a healthy diet too scrupulously" or are plagued with "Discord with Neighbor, Lodger, or Landlord Disorder" (YES that's actually in the DSM!)--then I'll go with the "KISS" rule of thumb (that's what I understand ta be keep it simple stupid) that speakin' up is GOOD not dumb an' those who traffic in self help (I daresay) would prefer we all keep quiet an' peacefully "go with the flow!"
So if ya wanna kick yerself, get some paddin'--I fer one wanna say THANKS A BUNCH for exercisin' yer jaw that day--there were waaay too few of us there to lift up the drape on the 3 card monte table!
Mindfully spoken from the peanut gallery! (I hope this ain't the end of Rico! ha ha)
PS--you said "The writer and the topic don't really matter. "
I'm 'a gonna call you on that--the writer perhaps not so much, the topic? Nu? C'mon...the problem is it DOES matter! I never thought I'd need ta take on THAT battle in all my born days but ill-prepared as I am--I come out fightin' when they come for "us!" An' damnit---it DOES matter! ;-)