So some months ago I was banned from a Facebook page called “Meanwhile in Australia”. I don’t want to draw too much attention to the page, but it spends a bit of time doing what one might view as rage-baiting, as well as what some people would consider stereotypically Australian stuff which is also viewable as toxic but it’s just a joke so it’s fine, and the merest fart of criticism is unacceptable. Will delete posts that doesn’t go the way that’s wanted, you know, that kind of stuff. Pretty standard.

Sometimes the page expresses what some might consider as a move toward equality, or an expression of progressive views, but generally there’s enough stuff that can be considered as not.

Toward the end of last year the page started sharing stuff about Australia Day early, and naturally it was viewable as rage-baiting and of course a good deal of rage came out from people defending and criticisng the day. I’d been thinking about leaving the page for a while because of what it puts forward, but they made the decision for me when I said something along the lines of “You could probably do less rage baiting”(sic) on a non-Aus Day post complaining about people complaining about the “controversial” posts from the page, which itself was quite viewable as rage-baiting. Was banned in three minutes, and I heard the post was taken down a little later.

At first I was somewhat surprised, considering I’d criticised their ongoing coverage of Raygun despite complaining about people giving Raygun attention because there were more important issues. Did the same when the page complained about people arguing over a kangaroo despite their bringing a lot of attention to said kangaroo. But yeah; Decision was made for me, and I’ve been better off for it.

But, you know, there’s something interesting here, and this post is not really about “Meanwhile in Australia”. This is about the economy of attention, and how problematic it is, because it is problematic.

There’s plenty of ways to get attention and rage is probably one of the easier ones. Draw people in, get them engaging in an annoyed or frustrated way, keep them arguing. Throw a funny in here and there, and maybe something uplifting, then more rage. Generate more anger. Get people talking. Keep them engaged. Put the question out to them rather than a statement that is perceivable as rage-baiting. Now they’re voting due to a question that shouldn’t be controversial but is. And it keeps on going.

I get that people want to be involved, but it’s still disappointing when it comes to this stuff. It rarely is rage-baiting for good. It’s often rage-baiting for attention. But beyond that what is there to say? What could I possibly provide? Attention is currency, and the more it’s received, the easier it is to generate popularity which can be turned into income.

When I occasionally remember “Meanwhile in Australia”, and I think about how utterly banal it was, and how it reveled in being merely okay at best, and how the page continued to do things that appear to just be purely for attention. I have to wonder if it’s a place that’s willing to actually engage in self-awareness, especially considering that the admin is willing to delete posts if they don’t seem to go the way they want them to. But I also think about how we have all this potential to stop engaging in what ends up being an inefficient use of our time, but so many of us are willing to waste our time when we’ve better things to do.