A Reaction to the Defense of the James Holmes Tribute Page

July 27, 2012 § 4 Comments

Yesterday, Fruzsina Eördögh posted a piece to Read Write Web defending one of several James Holmes Facebook (and obviously troll-made) tribute pages. I’m quoted in the piece, and for once was framed as LESS permissive than the interviewer (typically when I give interviews the dynamic is reversed — I’m the one attempting to contextualize or offer a more measured account of whatever behavior). As Eördögh writes:

It doesn’t matter where the dozen or so Facebook users behind the joking spend most of their time – 4chan’s notorious /b/ board, an Encyclopedia Dramatica IRC channel or a Something Awful forum. After the Colorado shooting, they came to this digital place, hung out, told jokes and laughed. Phillips advised against framing the page as “an emotional or coping mechanism” because “trolls motives may vary,” but, when you imagine the amount of time the Facebook creators spent making their pages, it’s hard not to think the trolls were grieving in their own way.

Of course, that doesn’t make the jokes polite or tasteful. “It’s important to place these sorts of transgressive behaviors in context, but it’s also important not to sugarcoat the behaviors,” Phillips wrote in an email. “They troll because it upsets people, and because they derive amusement from their targets’ distress. National tragedies are a perfect opportunity to capitalize on heightened sensitivities, and so that’s precisely what they do.”

But free speech covers impolite and distasteful statements. And on Facebook – if the site will allow – we can all grieve together.

As is probably obvious just by reading the above quotes, I’m quite wary of this explanation. Which isn’t to say that I think Eördögh is wrong to challenge the accepted narrative regarding RIP trolling (i.e. “it’s bad”). Rather, I take issue with the idea that RIP trolling is equivalent to or indicative of “legitimate” forms of mourning. To reiterate an earlier statement, trolls are, above all else, trolls — whether or not the act of trolling allows them to work through their own grief (which by the way isn’t how any of the trolls I’ve worked with have framed their behaviors, in fact I can imagine most of them lolling mightily at such a suggestion), their aggressions are primarily, and definitionally, externally focused. Trolling first, in other words, and feelings –however complicated they might be– later.

My basic argument is that, while there’s much more to say about RIP trolling than simply “it’s bad,” it’s also important to call it what it is, and furthermore to acknowledge the behavioral and emotional variation even within this relatively niche troll space. In other words, making the blanket statement that RIP trolling is good/healthy flattens the individual behaviors into one monolithic category just as quickly as making the blanket statement that RIP trolling is bad/sociopathic. As always, the truth falls somewhere in the middle, where the waters are deeper, muddier, and are as overrun by sharks as they are with plastic floaty toys.

Tagged: , , , , , , ,

§ 4 Responses to A Reaction to the Defense of the James Holmes Tribute Page

  • Frank Ancona says:

    “when you imagine the amount of time the Facebook creators spent making their pages, it’s hard not to think the trolls were grieving in their own way.”

    LOL. “amount of time”????? It takes about a minute to set up a fb page, and another 2-5 to grab and maybe shoop an image. It takes a ton more energy and time than that to play whatever timesucking game is now popular on facebook. What the fuck is this guy huffing?

    As for grieving that’s just stupid. You might be able to say that RIP trolling for a thing like this is actually a coping mechanism for dealing with a mind-bottling, fucked up situation, but GRIEVING???????? Sorry, nope, try again.

    I’ve made a ton of fake memorial pages and ragebaiting pages before my permaban from facespace, and they were always to piss stupid people off because I like that, especially the grief tourists. Plus making them hypoocrites who send you death threats, that’s always fun.

    • Yeah, I was a bit surprised by the time issue too. It is –well, it used to be, before all the changes– pretty quick and easy business. And I was surprised by the grief angle as well…….I’m intrigued that the conversation is opening up in this way, a year ago I NEVER would have expected to see that sort of article. But still, I’m wary of any sort of blanket statement (whether especially positive or especially negative) that purports to speak FOR trolls. There are way too many variables for that…

      Also, thanks for reading, and for the comment!

      • Frank Ancona says:

        But you speak for the trolls. Your our Lorax.

      • THEN WHO WAS ONCE-LER???

        But naw, my job isn’t to speak FOR trolls. My job is to try and understand what trolls are communicating, both the good/creative and the bad/destructive. And to present the fairest and most reasonable account possible. That’s the most important thing…

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading A Reaction to the Defense of the James Holmes Tribute Page at a sandwich, with words???.

meta

%d bloggers like this: