Home Artists Posts Import Register

Content


美國大選演變到佔領國會死人,特朗普內閣成員辭職割蓆,既是難以想像,又是意料之內。寫下去,一定有很多朋友不高興,但這是幾個月觀察下來的感受。

反正我不是靠網絡點擊開飯。

特朗普是一個很特別的總統,因為破格,優點、缺點都非常明顯,從前也多次談過,不贅。而在香港、台灣,普遍情緒上支持他,更是完全可以理解。今年要二選一,他是我的選擇。

假如特朗普要證明自己沒有落敗,而通過所有合法途徑,都未能達到目的,這只有2.5個可能性:美國制度已經徹底腐敗,被deep state控制,必須通過非常手段變革;制度健全,他確實已經落敗。另外半個中間落墨的選項,就是制度大部份腐敗,需要改革,但是不能影響國家穩定,只能今後逐步來。

特朗普的主觀意願,相信是第2.5個:拒絕承認落敗,強調美國制度有問題,但沒有玉石俱焚的打算,只是希望以這形象繼續momentum(無論為公為私)。但操作上,沒有相信極端選項的群眾,就達不到中間落墨的效果。於是,就有了1月6日的事。

其實在美國,這個平行時空,依然相對rational。在華人世界,卻是另一回事。

月前談論過演算法、FOMO,如何在網絡世界提供額外誘因,令香港、台灣、海外華人網民,代入到一個平行時空的美國總統選舉。

假如在美國,支持特朗普的人大概有一半,在香港網絡,特朗普粉絲則明顯佔多數。而且在國安法通過後,momentum無處發洩,支持特朗普,也承繼了香港反送中運動的momentumn。

換句話說,只要是支持特朗普的言論,在網絡世界,忽然成了票房保證。由於演算法鼓勵二元獨立的viral,有了二元對立的選舉,支持特朗普的engagement急升,再加強了支持特朗普的誘因。由於需要對立面,在選舉結束後,對立面就由拜登,逐步變成美國精英(包括共和黨主流派)控制的「deep state」。而由於deep state之所以deep,就是因為不容易找到具體證據,所以論述可以不斷延續下去。何況到了後真相時代,論證deep state,也是輕易而舉。只要進入了上述「內循環」,不知不覺間,就會和現實世界完全切割。

就像佔領國會,現在連特朗普本人也要公開隔蓆,任何common sense一看到這場面,都知道要切割。全球最堅定「齊上齊落」的,就只有一些港台KOL。他們當中,固然有真正研究美國的專家,相信特朗普被不當勝選;但更多是演算法帶動下的自然反應。

KOL本身就是一個很反諷的標籤,因為在世上,真正的「KO」和「L」都很少,演算法也不大容許。反而根據大數據,去決定用甚麼標題黨、說甚麼內容,卻非常容易。

結果,根本沒有任何東西,在後真相時代,可以falsify上述論據。慢慢地,除了特朗普相關討論,這個世界,也會出現大量其他論述。由於在其中毋須接觸另一個世界,都可以產生經濟效益和行為,久而久之,兩個世界就互不相干。

特朗普的目標:建立alt right的國度,在現實美國很難成功,但在另一個世界,卻早已成功。反過來說,要這個國度的原住民離開,返回「現實」世界,其實沒有誘因。

美國如是,其他地方,何嘗不是?

Comments

Dennis Lee

願者上釣

Martin Chan

由特朗普開始做總統,到佢宣布要競逐連任,我認識嘅所有西方世界朋友幾乎一面倒地反對佢。有朋友更加直言「anyone but Trump」。其實啲人唔係反對共和黨,只不過特朗普太過破格、唔緊規矩做事,先至會令到西方世界嘅人對佢嘅形像比較負面。 但係佢哋就正正唔明白,只有佢呢一種獨立特行嘅形式,先至係中共預料唔到、最害怕嘅一種行事方式。 有錯請指正,謝謝。

WHO ?

教授在文中多次提及deep state,請問可否寫一篇對deep state 看法嘅文章,尤其我發現對於deep state,意見亦非常兩極,一邊將deep state的能力無限放大,一邊將deep state 視作不存在的陰謀論

Cecil Ma

我估計香港有20-40萬人感染咗「袁大看」病毒,最顯著病徵這兩天才能確認,就是相信「彭斯賣國」。

Anonymous

一個有趣的問題:假如KOL的角色是為了滿足觀眾需要講一些佢地鍾意聽的說話,咁佢地係咪仲算有‘影響力’呢?因為如果某些KOL只係講觀眾想聽的說話,未必能影響佢地意見,特別係如果KOL想改變觀眾意見,提出一些佢觀眾唔想聽的話,係網絡時代呢個KOL好容易就比其他人取代(有演算法幫助尋找符合自己立場的KOL),而且好多KOL都有靠Patreon等等叫人課金,變左KOL只是作為一個滿足觀眾對特定意見需求的服務提供者,咁呢種關係真係似市場買賣一堆觀眾想聽的資訊,而非由媒體提供專業的媒體意見評論進而啟發讀者,KOL都係'content creator',不過變左做create d觀眾想聽的'content'(但未必真實)。最後有關特朗普建立虛擬國度分析得好,好似教授之前講佢無得做總統可能自己搞新媒體,於是要搞場大龍鳳刺激支持者佢係被迫害的,但又唔想上身宜家要割席,損害的卻是民眾對制度的信任(雖不是大部分但已夠麻煩),亦即民主制度的根本。

AN05

So... who is taking the red pill or the blue pill? Or only blue pill is being offered? Everyone thinks he/she (or amen/awoman) is speaking the truth nowadays. As for Trump, "character is destiny". PS. I do pick Trump but that's another story.

saeko

見今朝拜登話:“They weren’t protestors. Don’t dare call them protestors. They were a riotous mob, insurrectionists, domestic terrorists.” 咁樣好咩? 我都知而家打trump,唔往死裡打更待何時,但佢將trump之能崛起嘅成個網絡同群眾都標籤為terrorist……可能係出於精英觀點? 佢覺得一定係所有人都會離棄trump? 但事實上唔係丫嘛。所以呢鋪真係中共最開心。

Zero

教授呢篇文都寫得好就住,應該經過反覆雕琢黎令人感覺客觀d😅

Anonymous

彈劾或者起訴特朗普成功, 必定被激進trump粉視為制度(包括主流共和黨)被控制迫害trump,進一步損害佢地對民主制度信心。宜家搞到咁,拜登話要大和解,好難。

Pach

完全係我心入面個句。。。係twitter睇住香港人亂咁發洩亂咁比喻,但係睇唔到成個picture,我係真係覺得恐怖。。。

?!?! ?!?!

重點係,Trump上任並唔係空穴來風,無端端做咗,而係背後美國嘅深層次矛盾,即使佢今次落敗,甚至永不翻身,都一定會再有特朗普2.0,3.0出現,或者香港人都將香港嘅情況類比咗落美國到,覺得特朗普好合香港人心水,姐係反香港啲所謂「精英」同「媒體」

Chapman Yeung

同電視上啲財金演員一樣囉, 表面係俾獨立意見嘅專家, 實際上係講啲你想聽嘅嘢(eg 啲成日穿嘅支持位)嘅財演..

Diamond S

謝謝你。好認同。但見到咁多黃絲朋友都失去平日理性 忘記抗爭嘅價值觀 實在令我覺得好震驚失望恐懼。其實trump同習近平有咩分別?都係害死好多人 都係利用群眾 都係搞民族主義。香港人/反共嘅人係咪真係咁絕望?

change now

經過了1 年半,仍然說誰誰誰被煽動,大佬,香港人已經識睇唔同新聞去獨立思考,今次全球媒體現哂形,KOL亦一樣

Gary Lee

天馬行空亂咁估,1 月6 日O既事係一單 deal 黎。解鈴還需繫鈴人,要解決龐大 Trump 支持者對體制不信任,最終都係要 Trump 本人解說。時局越亂,越會逼到政權需要對 Trump 有一定妥協,例如局部免起訴免刑責,先可以令 Trump 走。用選票贏佢只係第一回合,如果要諗住真正清算佢,就算你搞到佢坐監,佢O既後續仍然會來。戲還在不停上演中,只係香港人如果諗住要靠國際線打救,真係要鬥長命一下。共產黨最大贏家真係唔係講笑。

永振 陳

沈教授您好!有一個Netflix 紀錄片 Social Dilemma 您聽說過嗎 很值得一看 ?他們有一些對於我們現在受到社群媒體影響形成很多矛盾的平行宇宙會很精闢的分析...

katrina

一開始都有認真聽下,但由袁KOL提到原來佢個main source 係班農果日開始,就知道佢果d 只係另一個平行時空世界嘅「facts」

Chocobean

>建立alt right的國度,在現實美國很難成功,但在另一個世界,卻早已成功。反過來說,要這個國度的原住民離開,返回「現實」世界,其實沒有誘因。----原來我屋企人裡面,到依家仍然盲撐侵嘅人,唔會考慮移民,理由係如教授所講,佢哋已經成為咗alt right國度嘅居民

Wis

Thank you Dr Shen as always. This is the hard stuff people need to hear.

Anonymous

認同你講妥協赦免係無可奈何避免國家分裂的方法。但假如如你所說這也在特朗普預算之內係‘做deal‘,咁特朗普就係為左自己利益將整個民主制度’較飛‘同令中共漁人得利,極度自私,不過為左顧全大局,唯有唔追究佢。事實上我覺得trump係 '做deal’的機會頗高,因為唔少現實發生情節同沈教授之前預計的幾似(呢篇文 https://www.patreon.com/posts/tu-fa-shi-kong-43560535?utm_medium=clipboard_copy&utm_source=copy_to_clipboard&utm_campaign=postshare),包括不斷打沒有勝算的court case,即使不斷敗訴都可以claim自己未輸,唔直接鼓勵激進行為但也不割席,到最後‘佔領國會’,迫拜登為了不讓國家分裂退讓。

Chocobean

『其實啲人唔係反對共和黨』 -- 唔係。美國,民主最大嘅敵人唔係Trump,亦唔係GOP,係money in politics. 共和黨只係腐敗得比較表面,但由citizens united已經可以見到普通『人民』嘅訴求已經被貶低,anyone but trump只係因為佢係比較明顯嘅眼中釘,然後擁護trump嘅GOP都係好多人反對嘅目標

Johnny

加上五毛公關幫手吹棒

44yen

This has been a difficult conversation with our brothers and sisters. Thank you for attempting to walk us through the issue in a logical manner. I wouldn't be surprised if CCP or 5cents would take advantage of the division and amplify it. I still believe that we should not lose our sense of moral and logic in face of CCP, no matter how attractive the option may be.

44yen

The bigger question is, is it really just the fault of the algorithms? I think there are a lot of manipulators who has been purposefully spreading these rumours and alt reality. I highly recommend 'MindF*ck' from Christopher Wylie to learn how different interest groups are setting the World on fire on purpose. Steve Bannon is one such character. Intelligent and charismatic, but have every intention to shake up the status quo no matter the means.

Wis

The word deep state sounds so conspiratorial. But people eat this up, hate to say it but especially Asians. I'm not Dr Shen but I think the so called deep state is just institutionalists or career officials. You've already seen it in full display, sec of state in Georgia, conservative judges, people who can still sometimes separate world view and their duties. Because I don't buy the more nefarious version of it for even one second. If there's an actual deep state, why would Trump have been even elected?

Rickie Wong

特朗普與眾KOL都已經把想象與現實混淆。一直沈睡不醒,可以繼續樂在其中。當現實世界與想像中世界的落差越來越大時,難免失落、沮喪、驚惶失措。看眾KOL現在不停在兜,自打嘴巴,全無邏輯。無法脫離虛幻世界,令人搖頭。

Eric lin

若從州法院到聯邦法院裁定選舉合法。請問美國法律有問題定Trump有問題。一早己經講Trump 是對美國人民及constitution危險性人。是否要美國內戰才可以收手。現在GOP已經比Trump 玩殘。經過上一年,大家主觀認為他會對抗中共是破格。一個自私對代自己美國人會為香港人出頭。有些自名才子同在美國香港分行做幾年事,才會對他產生強烈情緒

Eric lin

Remember what he said “ proud boy standby “.

Alban Kwan

The question would be “how” we can minimise the polarisation and penalise fake news. Is it a forced restructuring of social media commercial model? Is it a retraction of CDA Section 230, thus social media become liable to content posted? If so, how do we ensure real free speech can be maintained?

Jon T

Yuen always has an agenda. That’s why their opinions should never be conflated as facts. Take their views with a grain of salt but never treated them as the absolute truth.

Jon T

Agreed. And of course they were gloating it: the decay of democracy. It (democracy) isn’t perfect. But to discard it what we would get: dictatorship with unlimited quest for absolute power. The fundamental lesson learned from this sorry episode is that we must safeguard democratic values, and constantly improving checks and balances so no one can abuse them.

Jon T

And who were at the Capitol Hill that day? Proud Boys and their acolytes, QAnon followers... Unfortunately, I doubt this won’t be the last time we would see these people...

Jon T

Good question! Unfortunately I doubt the polarisation of fake news can be minimised. Penalties can be applied only in a condition where disinformation is in fact libellous or defamatory. The argument is that we as content users, exercise our own freedoms in reading fake news. The line is blurred, by the fact that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinions or beliefs. I think on the other hand to counter fake news is the proliferation of independent fact checking sources that are free from political and institutional influence, and for us readers to support real journalists whenever we can.

Alban Kwan

Very interesting @Hope! The issue of internet policy is indeed crucial. Glad that there are more people paying attention to it. Having said that, i think there are still a number of problems in relying on fact checking: 1. Fact checks that do not fit with ones believe can be easily accused of being fake; 2. As with the tactics of HK pro-BJ sites such as 幫港出聲, as soon you try to censor them, they can make similar influence by restructuring post as opinions, unless we censor opinions as well, you can hardly stop them; 3. Social media is their own world, what can or cannot be posted follows their platform governance policy. It is very hard to check and balance them as they are also the law maker.

Anonymous

I agree with you as well. For 1 and 2, the crux of problem in 'post-truth' era is that facts are subject to different interpretations and manipulations so it is not easy to falsify facts proposed by a content user and it is difficult to differentiate between facts and opinion. I will say this is the limitation of fact checking by centralized agent approach, and to mitigate problem, we have to revert to what @ Jon T has said on users side, and what Dr. Shen has mentioned before on educating the public like that in Finland. I will say both my approach (centralized agent approach) and the content user approach both have its limitation (since it is difficult for content users to conduct all fact checking themselves), so both approach supplement each other and has to be used together. For 3, I think although policy in each platform maybe different, what we have discussed so far is that the platform should take up more responsibility while preventing them from abusing their power at the same time, and regulations in this regard is necessary, such that the government has an important role to play and it is not only that the company's policy that matters. Moreover, to prevent the social media firms from manipulating public opinion in the name of removing 'fake news', we have to introduce check and balances to them such that when they exercise their power, the government will have to check whether the social media platform has abused their power. In other words, when social media ban fake news, it is no longer a matter of purely the policy of private companies, but government (including all 3 branches) will have a role to play/

Carol Liu

我是香港移民,我不喜歡拜登,但更不能容忍特朗普多四年,是他令國家嚴重撕裂,極右抬頭。美國很多支持特朗普的華人,引用的所謂真新聞,是大紀元,恕我不能苟同。