Vultures: The Commodification of Traumatic Spectacle

Vultures: The Commodification of Traumatic Spectacle

A landed plane never makes the news. Why are attention hungry algorithms rewarding creators for selling outrage in an age where attention is currency ? That’s a rhetoric question because the answer is in the question and it is exactly that ; because attention is currency. Let me explain. The human psyche has a unique relationship with spectacle. Scientists claim that certain types of signals such as fighting, gore or pornography touch certain spots in the brain that can produce a euphoric effect in people. A feeling that can be described as akin to taking a drug. Drugs as one knows can tend to be addictive depending on which drug and who is taking it. Ancient Romans used to watch gladiators fight to the death just for the sake of entertainment through spectacle. Kings and royal families would call artists from far and wide to come perform for them in grand theatres. Human beings have throughout time loved the spectacle. 

A significant and recent piece of art that tackles the psychology of the human mind around spectacle is a 2016 movie called Nope. In this movie Jordan Peele the producer describes one of the major themes as spectacle. He highlights how human beings have always been fascinated by the spectacle of real horror especially if it as the expense of someone else’s trauma and then exploitation of that trauma for profit. He highlights how people have always had a demand for visceral and real life horror and how in the modern world capitalism has hijacked that demand for these traumatic events and done what capitalism has always done; turned it into a profit. The real reason why people get hooked on this stuff doesn’t have a clear scholarly consensus yet however what cannot be argued is that human beings have always had a fascination with spectacle especially of the traumatic real life horror kind. Spectacle has an effect on everyone and depending on the type almost leaves a spectator in a trans like state. In the current day we have multibillion industries built around spectacle ; boxing, football, Olympics etc all which attract attention that capitalism and capitalists have found a way to profit off of. In my immediate society a lot of the youth have developed an attachment to the spectacle of football to a point where some base their whole life around football maybe as a coping mechanism probably . In the modern age where attention is now commodified and big tech companies have these online platforms whose currency we have agreed is attention ; it would only make sense that whatever content that can keep you a consumer on their platform for longer is what would be pushed and promoted. But the problem is not just the algorithm because after-all it’s just lines of code; the problem is with the content creators who are aware of the dynamics of how these big tech company algorithms work and then use that to their advantage. Being aware of the type of content algorithms are likely push some content creators intentionally upload misinformed, traumatic and outrageous content for the sake of attention farming in whatever form it comes; views, virality, marketing opportunities, clout, fame etc and the unfortunate thing is that this method has been proven to work. So now one would ask what role does a particular spectator of such content play in this situation. A significant one because at the end of the day it is the attention and time these consumers give to this type of content that allows the big tech platforms to make profits. Recently in my home country Uganda there was an incident where an innocent man was murdered by a mob in cold blood. It was a controversial incident that sparked discourse among citizens about mob justice and its place in our society but that is an entirely different conversation. Around the time of the incident I observed several different approaches/ reactions by content creators but I will highlight three. 

1. Some content creators didn’t feel the need at all at least in the moment to have any commentary on the matter. They simply sent their condolences to the family of the late and kept it pushing. Personally I feel that this is the best/ emotionally intelligent way of dealing with such a situation because it takes into consideration that people are in the process of grieving someone so atleast the kind thing to do would be to give them time and space. 

A second group of content creators talked about the situation when it was still a hot topic which I do have issues with because the bereaved family is still grieving but if you must talk about it ; at least handle the issue with care and which for the most part they tried to do. 

 3. Then there is a third group. Just opportunistic scavengers. Taking easy prey and low hanging fruit. A group of content creators who simply wanted to capitalize on the issue to get likes views or whatever at the cost of the people who were going through this traumatic event and to me this is the most morally reprehensible stuff. Bottom of the barrel behavior. One of the biggest content creators in Uganda unfortunately falls under this category and in their commentary on the incident they even went as far as sexualizing the partner of the deceased. Absolutely disgusting stuff. Did I mention that this is one of the biggest content creators in the country. That brings into question to the current mental state and psyche of an audience that demands and consumes such abhorring content.

 I genuinely wish my people could want better, more educational and engaging content but alas that is where we seem to be as a society and that is a problem. There are two solutions I can suggest to this problem ;

 2 is for the audience to want and demand better from the content creators whom they subscribe to. To evolve in their tastes/preferences and to seek more educational and substantive content which they can gain from and meaningfully engage with. And to check the content creators anytime they put out problematic/divisive/ offensive content. 

3. Content creators who have a following and influence in their own right should be careful and considerate about the content they put out. They should be able to self censor and gauge what type of content they feed their audience.

 NOT EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE CONTENT. However if they fail even at that then a governing body over content creators can create policy that regulates the type of content creators are allowed to produce. However this is one trickier as some creators can take it as an infringement on their right to freedom of expression as creators. But we need to do better as a society in our day to day. Ask yourself if you encountered someone who just had an accident and was dying what would your reaction be ; to pull out your phone and record them or to help them in anyway you can and possibly save their life. In the early 90s in Sudan during the time of the civil war a South African photo journalist named Kevin Carter took that picture. The one with the child and the vulture . When he flew back to his home country the photo was generally received mixed reviews. Some loved his photo for the spotlight it put on Sudan and the harshess of their reality so much so that he was awarded a Pulitzer Prize and rose to fame. Others criticized him heavily claiming he did nothing to help this child and only took this picture for exploitation purposes. He was questioned about the fate of the subject in this infamous photo but to no end as he himself said he had a flight to catch and couldn’t help the starving child . And after that he could not live with himself. Even though he had the power to intervene he didn’t and he just couldn’t live with the fact that he gained fame and notoriety over his commodification of this poor child’s traumatic existence and turned it into a spectacle. He killed himself. One poetic and powerful thing that can be drawn from that moment Kevin Carter took that picture is that they were two vultures in Sudan that day. One infront of the camera and one behind it.

By Dialemini Macdonald

SOURCE:

Nahum 3:6 (KJV) - And I will cast abominable filth up - Bible App

Spicer, André (April 2020). "Playing the Bullshit Game: How Empty and Misleading Communication Takes Over Organizations"

McCabe, Eamonn (30 July 2014). "From the archive, 30 July 1994: Photojournalist Kevin Carter dies". The Guardian. Retrieved 20 December 2018

[19]Kleinman, Arthur; Kleinman, Joan (20 November 2015), "Cultural Appropriations of Suffering", Cultures of Fear, Pluto Books, pp. 288–303, doi:10.2307/j.ctt183p6n7.28, ISBN 978-1-84964-432-7, retrieved 5 December2023