In mid-November 2021, 500 National Guard troops were placed on standby in Wisconsin, awaiting the potential chaotic scenes caused by the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse. (“Kyle Rittenhouse”, 2021) Indeed, this 18-year-old US teenager triggered the debate that mixed questions of racial justice, white supremacy, gun rights, and self-defense rights. These political-characteristic topics that followed the American partisan rivalry narratives were squeezed into one case. Beyond those national guards, far more people participated in the escalated debate on the Internet, which even lasted till today. When Will Smith slapped Chirrs Rock on the Oscar, he would never expect that Twitter’s trending topic linked him to Kyle Rittenhouse. For instance, a left-wing leaning Twitter account created a meme picture that ‘forgives’ Will Smith if he slapped Kyle Rittenhouse. (Twitter link:https://twitter.com/JewishResister/status/1509059222830559236)
It is noticeable that questions and debates were not solved after clearing all charges. The personal image of Rittenhouse was not recovered in some of the democratic party supporters. In other words, the process of rehumanization was denied on the Internet, where platforms are profiting from outrage and indignant argumentation. (Andrejevic, 2019, p.51) To some extent, the concern of filter bubbles underlines the degradation of people’s ability of empathy, which is presented in the form of refusing to rehumanize the opposites.
Filter Bubbles, Dehumanization and Rehumanization
The concept of filter bubbles could be defined as the phenomenon of individual users receiving algorithm-selected information that aligns with their pre-existing attitudes. (Geschke, Lorenz, and Holtz, 2019) This issue is raised under the background of modern media transformation, which outpaced the ability of individuals and society to absorb and respond. (Andrejevic, 2019, p.26) In other words, we are exposed to an enormous amount of information with limited capacity; thus, we need filters to select and prioritize. This is also benefiting the platforms. Online media providers can offer customized advertising that maximizes their profit. (Geschke, Lorenz, and Holtz, 2019) However, as Andrejevic (2019, p.30) alerted, automation is displacing the social processes, which emphasizes human bias. Algorithms cannot identify the intention behind individual judgment but would promote patterns that attract users. To a considerable extent, it underlines the concern that algorithms are turning values, beliefs, and ideologies into consumables. Although this seems like people could consume whatever information they like, their choices are actually filtered and limited by well-trained algorithms.
Cycles of identifying and emphasizing bias could amplify ideological segregation, which caused serious concern among scholars and society. (Flaxman, Goel, and Rao, 2016) Although some scholars would consider this phenomenon as a media panic, Andrejevic (2019, p.50) critically pointed out that the infinite pool of alternatives would mainstream those fringe, extremist views. Those old dominant narratives are inevitably challenged by their partial and incomplete character when compared to the infinite alternatives. Meanwhile, the decentralization could also be found in adopting traditional propaganda methods on social media. Woolley and Howard (2018, p.3-4) noticed the public opinion manipulation in some grassroots movements that could be traced to some parties, agencies and countries. The acceptance of propaganda and extreme ideological views may rise with the decrease in people’s empathy. As Andrejevic (2019, p.49) mentioned, people’s ability to participate in a community dialogue or consider others’ interests is degrading.
The essential condition of empathy is reckoning that others possess minds like our own, which those stigmatized groups cannot trigger. (Fiske, 2009) The process of describing and perceiving other human beings as less than human, although as wrong as it could be, is one of the crucial phenomena in modern society. (Haslam and Loughnan, 2014) Traditional media often conducted this in the propaganda of war or social issues like immigration and race conflicts. In the era of online media, one could hardly argue against that propaganda methods would not be studied and adopted accordingly. Haslam and Loughnan (2014) summarized the dual model of dehumanization, which originated from the distinct meanings of humanness. One is to deny human uniqueness, such as the ability of self-control, intelligence, and rationality. It dehumanizes people as animals with words like vermin, monkeys, or dogs. The other way is to deny human nature, including emotions, feelings, and personalities. Examples could be calling others machines, puppets, tools, or toys.
On the other hand, it would require a process of “rehumanization” to recover the reputation and images of targeted groups when the conflict abates. Halpern and Weinstein (2004) suggested that perceptual shifts could be essential for rehumanization. It means that society has started to be interested in taking perspectives of those stigmatized groups. However, this pattern is seriously challenged by the filter bubbles in this online era. As Andrejevic (2019, p.47) mentioned, the exposure of counter views or evidence could rarely result in empathetic thoughts but more likely to harden the pre-existed bias.
Kyle Rittenhouse and the Social Media
The diverse views of Kyle Rittenhouse were clear since the case happened on 25 August 2020. The public discourse presented a clear separation under the American political context. In the modern system of democracy, conflicts of political beliefs should normally follow the result of the judiciary system. However, the debate continued after the trial presented a clear and officially decided result. As mentioned in the beginning, the dehumanization of Kyle Rittenhouse continued in some online groups. To some extent, they proved Andrejevic’s point (2019, p.49) that filter bubbles would cause the decline of democratic deliberation efficacy. Political stances and partisan separation are emphasized before and after the trial, while the judiciary’s independence and authority are undermined. This could be the result of varied reasons. According to Flaxman, Goel, and Rao’s research (2016), news distribution on social media platforms is associated with higher ideological segregation than on traditional news sites. Although they also found greater exposure to opposite perspectives, the effect of such exposure is questionable. Geschke, Lorenz, and Holtz (2019) argued by summarizing from the cognitive motivational processes that individuals are motivated to search for pro-bias information and deny conflicting ones. Kleinnijenhuis, Van Hoof and Van Atteveldt (2016) also mentioned that voters tend to reinforce their political beliefs when exposing in a hybrid environment of social media and mass media.
Throughout the process of reinforcing political beliefs, patterns of dehumanization could be identified. For instance, some Twitter users called Kyle “The Butcher” Rittenhouse or focused on the “killing machine” in his hand. One of the famous memes was joking about Rittenhouse’s crying moment during the trial, indicating the lack of self-control and mocking the facial expression. According to Palmer (2022), this crying meme of has since been viewed more than 600,000 times. (Twitter link: https://twitter.com/may_kergen/status/1511758797924147205) A newly edited meme clips that joking on Rittenhouse crying for gas price has also been reposted for more than 4,300 times on Twitter. To a considerable extent, it proved that Kyle Rittenhouse is still considered guilty on the social media, and these online punishments are permitted or even encouraged.
Refuse to Rehumanize
The continuing meme creation represents the bubbled pattern of online information consumption. As Andrejevic (2019, p.61) pointed out, social media reconfigures the users as both consumers and brands. In this case, Kyle Rittenhouse’s personal image could be understood in both ways. Users could enjoy the emotional and moral superiority from the consumer level by joking about the moment Rittenhouse loses self-control. In other words, users are better or more human beings compared to Rittenhouse, whose reputation is marked as a lost-controlled murderer. Therefore, messages of empathy are less favored. Halpern and Weinstein (2004) also suggested that rehumanization could be achieved if the desired outcome is reconciliation. However, from the branding perspective, mocking and attacking Rittenhouse would spontaneously label users with left-wing political correct characteristics, including anti-violence, supporting gun control and race equality. It means to extend the discussion into a bigger context. This requires both parties and their supporters to agree on a reconciliation, which is more challenging with the contemporary polarization background.
The consequences of refusing rehumanization could be severe. Haslam and Loughnan (2014) summarized four major categories: reduced pro-sociality, increased anti-sociality, moral judgment, and some functional consequences. In this framework, pro-sociality and anti-sociality marked the influence on the groups conducting dehumanization. With the political separation of the Rittenhouse case, it means that left-wing supporters are less likely to collaborate or conduct collective help on their opponents. It could also lead to supporting harsh punitive treatment of the others. To a great extent, it further pushed the opinion polarization, and introduced online conflicts into offline social activities. The consequences of moral judgement could be a diminished moral standard. While Rittenhouse “escaped” the judiciary trial, social punishment could also be conducted, and extreme methods were more likely to be permitted. This partly explains the increasing anti-sociality, as research shows people are willing to harm dehumanized persons. (Haslam and Loughnan, 2014) Functional consequences are usually applied to medical cases, which is less relative to this case.
Summarizing the consequences, refusing the rehumanization that resulted from filter bubbles could further expand bubbles into a greater social context. The need for continuing dehumanization is resulted from the filter bubbles and will reinforce that bubble. It forms a social consensus that such activities are permitted and diminish the boundaries of further actions. The online activities would eventually cause offline issues, as many scholars are concerned, challenging the modern democracies that rely on negotiation and conflict resolution. (Geschke, Lorenz, and Holtz, 2019; Andrejevic, 2019) In other words, filter bubbles could diminish the base of conflict resolution by dehumanizing the opposites while not able to rehumanize them. Yet, this polarization process could be welcomed on the individual level, as they are empowered to acquire and consume infinite information. This further increased the difficulty of potential governance, which would inevitably encounter the liberal ideology reinforced by bubbles.
Conclusion
As Halpern and Weinstein (2004) mentioned, rebuilding interpersonal ruins is far more challenging than ruined buildings and institutions. The continuing mock and online attack on Kyle Rittenhouse marked and expanded the partisan gap in contemporary American politics. The influence of filter bubbles is not only limited to online activities but also expanded into social and political practices. As Andrejevic (2019, p.47) mentioned, exacerbating misinformation and breaking the conditions for deliberation have already become the strategies of some politicians and political movements. While social media users celebrate their power to consume seemingly infinite information, it strengthens the basis of conducting improper strategies. Dehumanization was researched with the background of genocide and severe wars, but the methodology could be adopted in the daily information distribution and caused considerable harm to society. The case of Kyle Rittenhouse represents a cycle of receiving filtered information and creating polarized opinions. Even with the judiciary result, this phenomenon could not be stopped, which should be the ultimate solution to political conflicts. The heat of trending topics not only provided greater spaces for continuing to dehumanize Rittenhouse but also empowered Rittenhouse and his supporters politically. The process of reconciliation disappeared, which increased the difficulty of practicing democracy and undermined the judiciary’s independence and authority. From this perspective, it would hardly conclude that the progress of algorithm automation benefits society as a whole.
Reference
Andrejevic, M. (2019). Automated Media. Milton: Routledge.
Fiske, S. T. (2009). From Dehumanization and Objectification to Rehumanization: Neuroimaging Studies on the Building Blocks of Empathy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1167(1), 31–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04544.x
Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). FILTER BUBBLES, ECHO CHAMBERS, AND ONLINE NEWS CONSUMPTION. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298–320. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw006
Geschke, D., Lorenz, J., & Holtz, P. (2019). The triple‐filter bubble: Using agent‐based modelling to test a meta‐theoretical framework for the emergence of filter bubbles and echo chambers. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(1), 129–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12286
Halpern, J., & Weinstein, H. M. (2004). Rehumanizing the Other: Empathy and Reconciliation. Human Rights Quarterly, 26(3), 561–583. https://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.2004.0036
Haslam, N., & Loughnan, S. (2014). Dehumanization and Infrahumanization. Annual Review of Psychology, 65(1), 399–423. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115045
Kleinnijenhuis, J., Van Hoof, A. M. ., & Van Atteveldt, W. (2019). The combined effects of mass media and social media on political perceptions and preferences. Journal of Communication, 69(6), 650–673. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz038
“Kyle Rittenhouse: Jury to decide fate of US teen gunman” (2021, Nov. 16) BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59352228
Palmer, E. (2022, Mar. 18) Kyle Rittenhouse Gas Meme of Him Crying at the Pump Viewed Over 1M Times. Newseeek. https://www.newsweek.com/kyle-rittenhouse-crying-gas-prices-meme-1689467
Woolley, S. C., & Howard, P. N. (2018). Computational propaganda : political parties, politicians, and political manipulation on social media (S. C. Woolley & P. N. Howard, Eds.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.