People so appreciated what I did, that I kept doing it.

I basically followed behind the rage merchants and then showed the truth behind the rage-inducing simplifications.

I could do this because I am trained in the law and I have a good grounding in American legal and political history (for example, I researched and wrote my Making of America series).

I blamed Twitter. I didn't understand what was happening with Cable News shows because I don't watch them.

2/

Over the past 6 months, reading the research of communications scholars, I began to understand.

As I came to understand, I grew testier and testier with what I was seeing.

When what felt like the millionth person would say to me, in an irritated voice, "Teri I agree with you in part, but the truth is that there are never any real consequences," I realized something was deeply wrong.

I wrote my FAQ page explaining. I tried sending people to the pages.

3/

But it was an avalanche.

(Some people complained about the fact that I sent people to my FAQ pages. What am I supposed to do? Answer the same question 1,000 times? Pretend like that garbage has a place in serious discourse?)

I was getting testy because I could see a problem.

It was was dangerous groupthink: dangerous because when thousands of people say the same untrue thing in the same words, something nefarious is happening.

4/

One feature of fasicsm is group chants.

How is "There are never any real consequences!" chanted by tens of thousands of people in chorus not a group chant?

I can guarantee that if I wrote this on Twitter, someone would say, "But there ARE never any real consequences."

On Mastoston there is 1 in 10 chance that I'll get that comment 😂

An improvement? I don't know.

At least a half dozen people responded to my post with irritation asking, "Why are you focusing on MSNBC and not Fox?"

5/

Why indeed?

"What about Fox?" is actually a propaganda technique called whataboutism. It was made famous in the Soviet Union. No matter what criticism was leveled against the Soviet Union, the answer was, "what about racial segregation in America?"

Ironically enough, whataboutism is a way to avoid accountability and deflect blame.

'We may distort the truth, but they lie more," does not excuse the fact that we distort the truth.

(also I don't like being told what I should write 😂 )

6/

I intend to continue my blog, but instead of responding to the latest rage, I will write about what interests me:

Who is included in 'we the people' and why?

How did our criminal justice system develop?

I'm also interested in voting rights history.

What I won't do anymore: offer commentary on the latest legal or political development.

Why? Because the moment I do, someone will tell me that there are never any real consequences and I will get testy and that testiness is a sign. . .

7/

It's a sign that something is wrong. That it's taking a toll on me.

I am sure it is taking a toll on a lot of people who are feeling anxious and unwell without knowing why.

Others are anxious because they are victims of the rage machine.

I am getting testy because I am completely disgusted by the rage machine.

I will put the finishing touches on my series, pin it to the top of each of my social media accounts.

8/

So it will be there as a resource.

Here is a fantasy: If people stop consuming rage content, it will stop being profitable.

It is a fantasy because it is too addicting.

Today's teachers and communications professors are teaching young people how to navigate information on the Internet and cable talk shows.

Similarly, people had to learn to evaluate written sources after the invention of the printing press.

9/

I get my news from print media because in print I am better able to skip the hype and opinions.

Also, in print, I can spot when a headline is misleading.

I have never gotten news from TV or cable. I don't like those talking heads.

On election night, I am generally working (I do voter protection work) but I watch the numbers and figure out which districts are reporting first.

I tried once to listen to the elections pundits and after 10 minutes I wanted to throw something at the TV.

10

For the people asking if I can find a way to continue offering explainers my answer is this:

If you stop listening to pundits you won't feel confused and you won't need an explainer.

If you stop listening to partisan pundits you'll stop viewing everything through the lens of "will this help Trump" and you will be more objective.

I didn't address a few of the more recent invented narratives. I may do that.

I'll let you all know when the series is in final form.

11/

@geophany Once weekly I get this in my box from the Post about the Trump trials:
https://s2.washingtonpost.com/camp-rw/?trackId=5986a242ae7e8a68160e418f&s=65ee1f8537548053961dc39a&linknum=2&linktot=48

It seems to me that it is written in accessible language. I've been reading this for a few months, and so far, I find it accurate without hype or spin.

@Teri_Kanefield

I don’t know if it’s possible or even if you would want to turn off comments, but would that make your job here any more appealing? Or ignoring them. It’s a fruitless task to try to cut through the hysteria—nobody can do that (although you gave it a good run), and I can understand that it could drive you nuts. How about just….not? Go back to the interesting part and let the noise go on elsewhere.
2/

@geophany

I thought about that.

I also thought about making a feed "invite only" where people have to pass a test to be invited :) I could conduct it like a class. If you don't like the professor, you don't call the professor names or start challening the professor. You drop the class and find a class you like better.

But for a while I think I'll change my focus.

Next I'll be writing about the history of voting rights. I hope you find it interesting.

@geophany

The problem is that there really are not many people like you.

Most of my followers also watch MSNBC panels and think these are valuable ways to get information.

They follow people like Larry Tribe, Andrew Weissmann, Elie Mystal, and others who I used to call Poppers (they pop off the tops of their heads) so I'm always having to tamp down the latest nonsense.

I figure if I start writing about interesing legal topics, I'll be able to write for a less misinformed audience.

@Teri_Kanefield

I’m not so sure I’m unusual, unless you really know otherwise. I think of myself as one of the quiet kids in the back while the annoying kids act up. At any rate I’m looking forward to interesting legal topics.

@geophany

One idea is to do a weekly commentary on the cases and post it only on my blog.

@Teri_Kanefield

That would certainly be welcome

@geophany

You may not be unusual. I have no idea what the numbers are.

I just know I was starting to feel like I was spending most of my time tamping down bad information.