Social media welcomes obnoxious content

During the train wreck that was Mike Bloomberg’s one debate appearance, he pointed out that Putin seems to favor Bernie. Bernie responded with tough talk to the effect that when Bernie is president, Putin won’t be interfering anymore. This was the obvious response, but the wrong one for at least two reasons.

First, it isn’t realistic. Mark Zuckerberg could perhaps rein in Russian interference if it was important to him, but, in fact, it’s not a Facebook priority. As long as we have social media as currently configured, there will be all manner of mischief — or should I say, unregulated content? — that no American president can prevent. Whether that fills your heart with joy, dread or nothing, it’s true.

This brings me to the more basic problem with Bloomberg’s remark. This was a debate among contenders for the Democratic nomination. Bloomberg’s point, to the extent that he had one, was that if Putin favors Bernie, the rest of us shouldn’t.

Hello! This logic puts Putin right in the driver’s seat. Like, we should all bear in mind what Putin wants, or is reported to want, and vote accordingly. Seriously? That’s part of your platform? Pay attention to what Putin wants?

From the schoolyard taunt to the race for president, it is hard to ignore the obnoxious. That is more or less the point of being obnoxious. As long as social media is what it currently is, it will welcome (i.e. profit from) all sorts of obnoxious content.

In the case of election meddling, it will often be masked. Our intelligence services and investigative reporters will, hopefully, unmask it. At that point, it really needs to go away as a campaign issue if we are ever going to have an election in which what Vladimir Putin wants is irrelevant.

Eric Kuhn, Middletown