Anna Holmes defines 'hype aversion' as a reflex against being told what to like, suggesting that popularity can create pressure rather than signal quality. This feeling can lead to a deliberate choice to resist mainstream culture.
The findings confirm research that I conducted more than 20 years ago. Under the guise of the Comedy Research Project, Timandra Harkness and I performed a randomised clinical trial to assess whether or not science can be funny.
The response was in Indonesian but shaped by values that centered individual autonomy over the consensus-building, social harmony and collective family dynamics that tend to matter more in Indonesian social life.
Owens described how Infowars aimed to create a cinematic experience, stating, 'We would go out there, we would shoot videos like we were in the weeds, we were showing what was really going on. But it was nonsense. It was lies.'
Not so long ago, if you said there was a shadowy cabal of elites who were involved in the sex trafficking of young women and girls and that some of the most famous people in the world were allegedly involved, then you would have been dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. On a certain level, it feels psychologically safe to other people who have conspiracy theories Jon Ronson even wrote a book called Them about extremists and conspiracy theorists.
The average American checks their phone over 140 times a day, clocking an average of 4.5 hours of daily use, with 57% of people admitting they're "addicted" to their phone. Tech companies, influencers, and other content creators compete for all that attention, which has incentivized the rise of misinformation. Considering this challenging information landscape, strong critical reading skills are as relevant and necessary as they've ever been.
A short while later, the White House posted the same photo - except that version had been digitally altered to darken Armstrong's skin and rearrange her facial features to make it appear she was sobbing or distraught. The Guardian one of many media outlets to report on this image manipulation, created a handy slider graphic to help viewers see clearly how the photo had been changed.
Most days, an email lands in my inbox with the promise to amplify my growth-my newsletter subscribers, the reach of my podcasts, the number of client leads, etc. I've gotten used to random people pitching me on their services, and some of the messages expertly prey on my insecurities as a business owner ("you're leaving so much on the table," et al.). I never answer any of them, but I sometimes wonder which ones might actually be legit.
Charlie Warzel opens with what it means to live in 2026, when our phones can drop us into graphic, real-time violence without warning-and when documenting that violence can be both traumatizing and politically consequential. Using recent footage out of Minneapolis as a lens, he explores the uneasy collision of algorithmic feeds, misinformation, and the moral weight of witnessing. Charlie also traces how viral documentation can puncture official narratives, pushing stories beyond political circles and even into "apolitical" corners of the internet.
