Re: High impacts considering lower amount of named storms.
Posted by
Chris in Tampa on 10/26/2024, 7:52 pm
Unfortunately, they get rewarded for it obviously. I don't get it. If someone tells people to constantly be scared of something, and then the vast majority of the time it doesn't happen like that, I'd be blocking them. Sure, they get some big views, but then in a perfect world everyone would tune it out eventually. But if they eventually get one call right enough, somehow they must manage to get a lot of people to forget all the times they were wrong. It's just kind of how a lot of social media has gone. It's driven by fear and whatever they can make people believe to generate clicks so that it gets passed on and on and the algorithms at this point must reward that kind of behavior. On certain platforms I'm sure that's the point, and on others they have just given up on trying to rein it in.
It's rather concerning that it gets so much audience. They could say something really dangerous, like for a storm that is actually threatening to maybe not evacuate or something like it. There are people who believe, apparently a lot, that think Helene and Milton were not natural, or at least not in part, and it just boggles my mind. They won't believe in climate change, but somehow some humans somewhere are pulling the strings on these things. It's just a new frontier of crazy that's larger than I thought it could be. I keep thinking it has to get saner at some point, but then there's new ways to show that it's not happening anytime soon.
I barely see that kind of stuff, but I can't imagine how much there must be. I can see why you used to get frustrated with it. Be reasonable, few people pay attention. Be loud and irresponsible, and the views come pouring in. |
1
In this thread:
Post A Reply