How do we confront the “digital clown” and the “arrogant” on social media platforms? | policy

The perspective that measures the success of the media message on social media sites based on the superficial interaction indicator, most notably “liking,” represents a deep structural flaw that must be addressed immediately from the perspective of media and information literacy.

The “Like” button has transformed from a simple sign of approval into a symbolic currency that guides the behavior of the content creator, and misleads our understanding of the true impact, giving a false value that is completely out of proportion to the cognitive value of the content.

The fundamental value of the message does not lie in the amount of public applause it receives in the open platforms, but rather in the depth of the cognitive penetration it makes in the collective consciousness. This is truly embodied in the phenomenon of silent consumption or conscious viewing.

The challenge we face today is not limited to just understanding the tools, but rather to free the serious and informed content creator from the addiction of “vanity metrics” and focus on what is happening in the mind of the recipient.

The massive viewing numbers that influential content can achieve are practical proof that the message has cut through the algorithmic noise, outperforming indicators of volatile, advertised engagement tens of times.

To understand the depth of this phenomenon, we must first deconstruct the psychology of silent consumption and its underlying power. Viewing means that the message has succeeded in crossing the “digital noise” barrier and occupied an actual space in the recipient’s field of awareness, which represents a decisive success in the cognitive reception stage of the information.

As for reluctance to admire, it is often not evidence of lack of interest, but rather a developed psychological and social defense mechanism. The deep issues addressed by media education, which require critical thinking and challenging assumptions, touch upon the ideological aspects or sectarian beliefs of the recipient.

Public expression of conviction or approval for this type of content may carry a high social or intellectual cost that the individual may not be willing to pay, especially in digital societies that exercise strict social control over expressed opinions.

The recipient resorts to silent viewing as a safe haven that ensures he receives the information and processes it internally, away from the pressure of collective acceptance or rejection. This behavior ensures that the seed of information has been placed in consciousness, starting its slow and cumulative work in forming concepts, so that silent consumption becomes the guarantor of the process of independent critical thinking that we seek, which proves that the cognitive impact is by its nature cumulative and slow, and cannot be measured at the speed of pressing a button.

The destructive impact of the culture of likes does not stop at misleading the measurement of impact, but rather extends to a negative and direct impact on the content creator himself. When admiration turns into a basic criterion for success, the content creator, even if he is an expert or specialist, turns into a victim of “external evaluation addiction.”

The human mind instinctively seeks instant reward, represented here by the echo and multiplication of “likes,” and this pursuit creates enormous psychological and professional pressures. The content creator’s feeling of digital neglect or low interaction numbers does not only translate into a failure of the content, but it often translates into a judgment about his self-worth and professional competence.

This feeling of inadequacy and futility pushes him towards cognitive and professional compromise (Content Compromise), so the writer finds himself forced to write what the listeners ask for, or what guarantees him a quick emotional reaction, even if that content is superficial, populist, or contradicts the specialized and ethical message in which he believes.

Thus, we see deep, consciousness-oriented content giving way to controversial or overly entertaining content, just to ensure the likes keep flowing. The quality of public discourse collapses, and the expert turns into a digital clown seeking to satisfy the algorithm’s ego.

To further deepen the analysis, likes cannot be completely separated from the external amplifying factors that distort them. The declared interaction is influenced by the strength of loyalty to the symbol, as the audience disengages from evaluating the message and admiration becomes a ritual of support and celebration of the person himself.

Likes are also affected by herd dynamics; Individuals tend to imitate group behavior, so they press the like button. Because they saw many people doing that, the process becomes mechanical and loses its true significance as intellectual conviction.

But the deeper impact comes from material and technical power; Celebrities and major entities have tremendous ability to cold-manipulate engagement numbers through paid promotion, buying targeted ads that ensure reach and generate engagement, or exploiting complex technologies to improve virality algorithms.

These factors make admiration a function of financial and technical ability, and not a function of the cognitive originality of the content, which perpetuates the injustice of independent and bold content that depends on the strength of its idea, not the largeness of its budget.

Here the essential and saving role of media and information education is highlighted as a therapeutic and immunizing tool for this negative phenomenon. The mission of media education goes far beyond simply teaching audiences how to use tools; Rather, it aims to build “media resilience” for both the recipient and the content creator alike.

The audience must be taught to evaluate content based on its cognitive quality, depth, and logic, not based on the number of likes or the fame of its publisher. This requires activating critical thinking skills to separate the message from the noise of external statistics and focus on the depth of the impact, not the speed of interaction.

At the same time, content writers and specialists must be directed to redefine success based on more honest “Impact Metrics,” such as analyzing actual viewing duration and content completion rates, rather than superficial engagement.

They must embrace the philosophy that true success lies in serving the mission and adhering to a professional standard, even if this leads to silent consumption, rather than sacrificing the mission for fleeting psychological reward. This intellectual shift is the only guarantee for creating a generation of content makers committed to knowledge, not marketing, and to honesty, not populism.

An authentic message, which seeks to build awareness and serve truth, must embrace the philosophy of cumulative impact. Large views are evidence that the seed of truth has reached the appropriate soil, i.e. the awareness of the recipient. This seed will grow and bear fruit in time, even if the supporting voices remain faint; We must realize that silent consumption is not evidence of lack of interest, but rather is often evidence of preoccupation with thinking and contemplation, which makes it the most honest and important voice in the process of media education, and accordingly the qualitative impact of enlightened media discourse is measured.