Her Campus Logo Her Campus Logo
USF | Culture > Digital

The Problem With Debate Content

Her Campus Placeholder Avatar
Maeleigh Fricke Student Contributor, University of South Florida
This article is written by a student writer from the Her Campus at USF chapter and does not reflect the views of Her Campus.

Debates can be an excellent way to find middle ground between two opposing viewpoints. Understanding where an opposing view comes from is crucial to keeping an open mind and can even help you gain a deeper understanding of your own beliefs. But what happens when a thoughtful conversation between opposing perspectives inevitably enters the social media machine?

More often than not, the results are overwhelmingly unproductive. Scrolling through this type of content usually leads you down one of two paths: either you find a creator whose worldview closely aligns with your own, and with each 30-second clip, you feel increasingly validated in your opinions, or you stumble upon a creator who represents the complete antithesis of everything you believe, leaving you astounded and frustrated that anyone could think that way. Sometimes, I even find myself annoyed when the person I agree with fails to articulate their point effectively — knowing full well that these videos are often edited and framed to make the opposing side look bad no matter what.

At some point, I stop scrolling and ask myself: What’s the purpose of these videos? I’ve narrowed it down to two possible goals: engagement and radicalization.

Engagement is the most obvious one. By creating intentionally frustrating and divisive content, these creators provoke angry comment sections, triggering the algorithm to amplify their reach. Even if most viewers are disagreeing with them, as long as the views keep coming in, so does the profit.

Sometimes, in an effort to radicalize their audience, these creators don’t even need to justify their stance. They simply need to make the opposing side look bad. By misrepresenting opposing beliefs, online debaters prime their viewers to believe an entire group holds a false — or even harmful — ideology instead of giving them a fair opportunity to explain their position. They achieve this through constant interruptions, “trap” questions (false dichotomies), or by portraying the individual they’re debating as representative of an entire population. These tactics make viewers increasingly intolerant of certain viewpoints, drawing them deeper into the ideology being pushed by the creator.

So, what is the best course of action? Simply being mindful while consuming this type of content goes a long way. If you feel tempted to leave a comment disproving a debater’s claims — no matter how well thought out — understand that doing so only helps popularize this type of content. And, of course, if you see someone in public with a camera and microphone (perhaps wearing a certain red baseball cap), do not engage. Once the camera is on, a healthy dialogue between two individuals is rarely ever the goal.

Maeleigh Fricke is a proud member of the HerCampus writing team at the University of South Florida. She is deeply passionate about using her writing as a way to discuss current events, and believes in the power of staying informed. She is also interested in art, and values using art history to gain a further understanding of a piece. She enjoys popular culture and social media trends, and exploring how these things are often heavily influenced by world issues.