Are you watchdog or FAULT-FINDER?
Play
Social media have brought us to a crossroads where the ability to distinguish right from wrong, fair from baised, is crucial
When it comes to evaluating people and events for public perusal, there’s a thin line between being a watchdog and being a fault-finder. The social media have blurred that line, and often it’s difficult to tell whether the “exposes” offered online are beneficial to the public interest or merely acts of personal vengeance, if indeed they are even factual. There are sound, authoritative postings that attract little attention and few “likes”, and there are dubious uploads that go viral. It’s getting harder to tell whether the social networks are being used helpfully or merely exploited.
The differences between a watchdog and a fault-finder can be stark, but also subtle. Regardless, it’s important to be aware of those differences. With the social media now a major part of our lives, we must thoroughly understand how they can influence us. Like it or not, the social media have brought us all to a crossroads.
If you are not sure if you’re a watchdog or a fault-finder, consider whether you would take video of someone jumping a queue and post it online to shame that person. Watchdogs do this routinely, even if they’re not part of the queue, since self-interest is superfluous to their intention.
The watchdog points out social misbehaviour in the hope of stopping it, whereas the fault-finder picks at the nits that bother him alone. The watchdog reacts to chance events, while the fault-finder is a hunter, stalking innocent passers-by who make a mistake that can be ridiculed, and any innocent blunder is grist for the mill.
The watchdog's prime objective is to change society. The fault-finder
wants to pillory individuals. The watchdog follows solid principles. The fault-finder’s only guide is self-promotion. The watchdog doesn’t criticise if he might behave the same way in similar circumstances. The fault-finder is often hypocritical. The watchdog feels “empowered” by the social media, but would never abuse that power. The fault-finder wields the power wildly like a sword, heedless of whomever the blade might strike.
A major reason why Twitter, Facebook and Instagram are so popular is that they allow us to present a version of ourselves that is always good and righteous.
It’s easy to hide our flaws and shortcomings. Both watchdogs and fault-finders make use of this element and enjoy virtually the same level of response to their posts. The wrongdoings they comment on attract more messages of condemnation and the good deeds bring praise. The phenomenon feeds on itself.
So, how to tell them apart? It’s rarely easy. We can only try to keep in mind that, as in real life, the social media are populated by people with starkly different motives.
In this digital age of lightning-fast communication, perhaps more than at any other time in history, it’s essential to stay fair, careful and open-minded. The social networks are becoming more “humanised” with each passing day, and thus increasingly reflect our bad traits as well as our good sides. It’s been said that the new media can utilise “the wisdom of the crowd” – or amplify “the stupidity of the herd”. The individual’s ability to distinguish between the two has never been more important.
