Web Communication - Rude, Crude and Socially Unaceptable!

Phil Butler,


FlamedI found a really insightful essay in the New York Times by Daniel Coleman. The article deals with online behavior and in particular "flaming" before thinking in online communication venues. After all, we have all been exposed to rude and antisocial behavior from other people since we first ventured here.

In fact, offensive messages seem to plague every dialogue we enter into, and often comments that are not meant to be offensive can easily be taken badly. The "flaming" phenomena actually has a technical name, it is known as the "online disinhibition effect."

According to the essay, in 2004 an article in the CyberPsychology & Behavior suggested that several psychological factors lead to online disinhibition: the anonymity of a Web pseudonym; invisibility to others; the time lag between sending an email message and getting feedback; the exaggerated send of self from being alone; and the lack of any online authority figure. Dr. John Sujler, psychologist at Rider University concludes that this effect can either be benign - as when a shy person opens up online, or toxic - when more aggressive people become uninhibited.

There is an emerging field called social neuroscience, which studies what goes in the brains and bodies between interacting people. This field offers clues into what exactly goes in to "flaming."

There appear to be some flaws in the inherent interface between the brain's social circuitry and the online world. In face-to-face interaction, the brain reads a continual cascade of emotional signs and social cues, instantaneously using them to guide our next move to effect good encounters. Most of this social guidance occurs in circuitry centered on the orbitofrontal cortex, or center for empathy. This center works to ensure that interactions are kept on track.

Research by Jennifer Beer, a psychologist at the University of California, showed that the face-to-face guidance system inhibits impulses for actions that would upset other people to throw interaction off. Neurological patients with a damaged orbitofrontal cortex lose their ability to modulate the amygdala, a source of unruly impulses like small children exhibit.

Socially artful responses are largely a function of neural chatter between the orbitofrontal cortex and emotional centers like the amygdale that generate impulsive behavior. The cortex needs social information - a change in voice or tone - to know how to select and channel impulses. In emails or chat rooms there are no channels for voice, facial expression or other cues from the person on the receiving end of textual communication. We do have cute emoticons to add punctuation and simulate emotion, but these rather lame icons lack the neural impact or an actual smile or frown. Essentially, the cortex has so little to go one in these types of communications that people are much too easily misread and misunderstood.

I have often misunderstood comments by other people. Sometimes it is simple to identify really young Internet users, as they often display this "flaming" mentality. It is a rather accepted thing now in forums, blogs; IM's and in chat modules. I must admit that oftentimes I have felt insulted by the lag in communication or with textual cues that appeared to be negative. I am sure the reverse is true for people on the receiving end of my messages too. I think that the advent of video chat and other more advanced communication modules will help this tendency, but we may feel even more insulted when the other person steps away to make a sandwich and does not come back for 30 minutes.

This essay really just fortifies what we knew all long about Internet communality. A good deal of misunderstanding can be avoided by entering into conversations with intelligent beings in my opinion. In the final analysis, we should be kind, understanding and patient with one another. I for one, always attempt to be courteous and to explain my comments so that other people's feeling will not be infringed upon.

Let Web 2.0 be about understanding, learning and a higher order of human interaction. Think about hitting the send button before insulting or inflaming your conversations! Be polite, it does not kill! The emoticon below does not fully represent how being flamed makes one feel, and besides this little guy can't choke the breath out of you yet.

Flaming Angry 


If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to profy RSS feed!
4 Comments (Subscribe to rss)
  • Great post Phil…

    But I really don’t like this: “Sometimes it is simple to identify really young Internet users, as they often display this “flaming” mentality.”

    Know why? Not all young people ‘flame’… Most have to put up with a fair deal of flaming themselves, and pinning flaming down on a single group of people is wrong, in my opinion. Just my thoughts, but I really liked the article. Very thought provoking.

  • I appreciate your thoughts David! I could have worded that better I suppose. This is the whole problem, we have a hard time understanding what one another means. Flaming people and being rude only makes the situation worse. You see by taking that little stand on a comment taken out of context, you appear to be differentiating yourself from the writer. I a very subtle way (to most people any way) you managed to accuse me of flaming all young people as a whole demographic. By doing this for whatever reason you are differentiating yourself from the writer.

    Why do people differentiate themselves? Is it just an accident, or is it like saying: “I would never even presuppose to say that any young person would ever do anything like be rude.” At the same time this guy here blatantly attacks all young people as escaped spawn from a Nazi embryo bank.

    I attempt to use words carefully. Yanking that comment out of context to make it look like I am after everyone from 12 to 30, whether intentional or not is not right. Sometimes, is a very general word. Really young take the easily identifiable flamer group way down. Displaying a mentality does not actually label someone as a flamer either.

    I just commented on an older guy pretty much flaming all of us that have anything to do with Web 2.0. If you would like to learn a gentle and meaningful way to point out that all young people are not idiots to someone who will never believe it, check out the comments by Mr. Wilson (I know ironic) and my related comment.
    http://profy.com/2007/02/21/wewin-gofish-mergers/

    I seldom make a quick comment as is customary to most bloggers these days. You simply cannot describe a true feeling with just a few words. I never want to misrepresent anyone or anything, though sometimes I do. I never said all young people “flame”. Restating it that way in a comment makes it appear that I did because most people don’t have the time or will to read closely enough to see if I did or not.

    Just for the sake of complete understating, please refer to the timestamps on these relevant posts. You will note that this comment is long after the one to the guy who hates the way the web is going.

  • I suppose if you review 2 paragraphs before the comment in question, where the point is made that similar behavior is exhibited in those who cannot modulate their amygdala, the “flaming” that exists online can be compared to young children because of the lack of typical stimuli. Our brains are taking in limited information as would a young child who doesn’t take note of body language or vocal tone to the degree an adult does. If you keep this in mind the comment doesn’t seem to be intended to insult a certain demographic. If you read only the paragraph containing this comment however, I have to admit, it definitely could be taken as pinning the “flaming” attitude on a certain age group.

    I think in the grand scheme the main point is that we are operating with lower levels of stimuli than we are used to communicating with. This results in a higher tendency for ANY individual to act more like a child online with his/her comments because the amount of information absorbed is comparable to that of a young child, along with the lack of an authority figure and other reasons already pointed out.

  • Thanks Brad. Someone read a post :) The nature of our abbreviated society is to more readily dismiss the individual, or their digital self. I think abyone can admit that it is easier to be rude here than standing right in front of a 270 defensive end type. Though I must confess, people in malls act in about the same fashion. I continually attempt to avoid falling on and injuring rude, crude and socially unacceptable individuals everywhere. They are not limited to any particular age group either. LOL

Leave a comment (We support avatars from Gravatar, MyBlogLog, and FriendFeed)