When introducing his 1994 book Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century 1914-1991, renowned historian Eric Hobsbawm expressed concern that “the destruction of the past, or rather of the social mechanisms that link one’s contemporary experience to that of earlier generations is one of the most characteristic and eerie phenomena of the late twentieth century. Most young men and women at the century’s end grow up in a sort of permanent present, lacking any organic relation to the public past of the times they live in.”
Hobsbawm offered that observation before the onslaught of wifi and multiple social media platforms, but those outlets give his words even more resonance in the early 21st century. The new media forms have generated countless maelstroms but for all the new cyberspace, there has been too little enlightenment, on the back of an obsession with sweeping generalisations, short-termism, fragments and unearned vanity. The BBC journalist Richard Fisher, in a book published this year, The Long View, described this as the “tyranny of the instant and the treadmill of the unending now.”
It is an unhealthy space to be in; social media forums can be empowering and helpful tools but can also work strongly against perspective and facilitate simplicities, distortions and propaganda masquerading as fact, too often in a bilious and righteous manner. Tweeting short, sweeping messages is clearly addictive, including for those who seem to think their wealth and profile makes them well placed to pronounce.
There was something inevitable about Paddy Cosgrave of the Web Summit falling on his Twitter sword given his history on the platform and his regular use of targeted invective. . What is comically common is for those who have whipped up a social media storm to then claim their tweets to a global audience have served as a “distraction,” as if they believed their messages were designed for something other than widespread attention.
Sometimes, Twitter storms are local and born of personal animus. In 2017, Barry Walsh resigned from the executive council of Fine Gael, expressing regret and apologising for the tone and language he used in tweets, accepting they had caused “serious offence” to many people. Ironically, he said he hoped his resignation would end the “trial by media” which he believed he had endured because of his tweets. He added: “I have always enjoyed robust political debate. However, I accept that with many of these tweets I took the political jousting a step too far.” This language was intriguing: when does jousting morph into malignity?
One of the leading historians of the Third Reich, Richard Evans, noted the danger of constant contemporary social media posts invoking the Nazi era as they are ‘eroding the full horror of history and the experiences of those involved’
Tweets from some Sinn Féin politicians based on historical events have also generated backlashes. In 2020, Laois TD Brian Stanley, on the occasion of the centenary of the Kilmichael ambush in Cork, when an IRA assault resulted in the deaths of 17 auxiliaries, tweeted “Kilmicheal [sic] (1920) and Narrow Water (1979) the 2 IRA operations that taught the elective of (the) British army and the establishment the cost of occupying Ireland. Pity for everyone they were such slow learners.” The Narrow Water reference was to the killing of 18 British soldiers by the IRA at Warrenpoint in 1979. Stanley subsequently apologised for his “inappropriate and insensitive” post.
In 2021, Conservative MP Simon Hoare, the chairman of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, apologised for the “offence” caused by a tweet about loyalist bonfires: “Who knew William of Orange arrived in Ireland with hundreds of wooden pallets hence the traditional pallet burning fiesta began.”
Many tweeters seem to find irresistible what they insist are historical parallels. One of the leading historians of the Third Reich in Germany, Richard Evans, noted the danger of constant contemporary social media posts invoking the Nazi era as they are “eroding the full horror of history and the experiences of those involved”.
...the damaging irony is that those embracing the social media free-for-all are facilitating the shutting down of real debate
It would be much more illuminating for the tweeters to elaborate on their thinking about history and the long legacies they seek to pronounce on in less than 280 characters, but the damaging irony is that those embracing the social media free-for-all are facilitating the shutting down of real debate.
[ Paddy Cosgrave is gone but can Web Summit survive?Opens in new window ]
This week, the UCD Law Society, which dates back to 1911, cancelled its planned panel discussion on the Israel-Palestine crisis. One of the debate’s convenors told one intended speaker that “a vast number of hate comments, as well as death threats and graphic propaganda videos were sent to, and viewed by, some of our society members.”
The society insists this was not the primary reason for the cancellation and that a number of guest speakers had pulled out, citing concerns about the framing and timing of the debate, but in its cancellation announcement, the society stressed the unacceptability of “hateful messages received on our social media”.
Such frenzies do untold damage to meaningful contemporary debate informed by historical perspective and a desire to listen and be heard.