We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
By Carlos Miguélez Monroy
The videos have served their purpose: many of the young people have been identified due to anonymous complaints from victims and their families. But it seems that the authorities overreached by delegating to a citizenry tired of violence, corruption and so many problems that beset them with the responsibility of identifying these members of violent groups. They forgot a fundamental principle of communication in the age of social media: you cannot control the consequences of photos and videos once they are posted on social media.
Now there are those who call for violent reprisals against misfits young people. In such an environment of violence, these young people run the risk of becoming victims of others with the same imbalance. Justice by one's own hand.
"How bad is the youth", say some adults, as if in their time there had been no "gangs" that looked for homosexuals to beat them or groups that went to macro-parties to hit. From the comments on social media and the coverage of most of the media, it seems as if there has been a sudden social breakdown among "good kids" from private schools. With a disturbing anecdote, many media have turned youth into a nest ofbullies who spend their free time bullying and hitting others for fun.
The publication of these videos in the digital versions attracts visits and this attracts publicity. Money. The mercantile is above the responsibility of informing with an adequate context, of asking about the causes, of generating an informed and calm debate, of identifying the age of problems that come from far back. The problems are magnified and distorted by the multiplier effect of social networks flooded by scenes of animal abuse, beatings, humiliations and violence without filter or context. Our view of the world is clouded.
This environment of negativity can lead to certainirremediable: Since everything is so bad, there is nothing to do. In the end, this benefits those who exercise violence or those who seek to take advantage of circumstances to justify abuses and abuses. Authoritarianism feeds on a certain perception of chaos and negativity.
The responsibility for the debate generated also falls on people, who have the freedom and responsibility to decide what they publish and what they comment on on their social media profiles. Before sharing with their contacts a video with sequences of violence or animal abuse they may ask themselvesfor what. “To give visibility to a problem”, we say many times by way of self-deception, because we already know, like the others, that there is animal abuse and violence. But we also know that every morning we get up to go to work, to go to study, that people around us do good things, help, play sports, take care of their partner, their family.
With greater reflection on the use of social networks, rejection and the boomerang effect produced by certain publications can be avoided, or the erosion of sensitivity to violence and the suffering of living beings. Sometimes we cause a lack of sensitivity when we seek just the opposite.
So much negativity generates a need for a counterweight that comes in the form of a flood of cooking recipes, as if we were going to have time in our life to follow all the recipes ofGood tasty. Cookbooks for health and happiness abound: broccoli and cauliflower, yoga,mindfulness and coaching, beautiful but badly attributed quotes. We will have to ask ourselves if we are not turning social networks into a hodgepodge against our boredom and loneliness.