I was scanning the headlines from a magazine I’ve recently taken interest in and noticed how many social buzzwords it had. Imposter syndrome. Diversity. Quiet Quitting. Obsessions about race and sex.
It got me wondering (for the millionth time) which came first. Is the public actually preoccupied with these topics, and the media is dutifully covering them, or is the media creating obsessions by endlessly framing issues from a certain point of view?
The answer is obviously “both” — it almost always is — but “both” doesn’t mean one isn’t dominant.
My strong suspicion is that it works this way. Some small group of socially connected, elite types get obsessed with some issue. Media elites rub shoulders with that crowd, so they pick up those attitudes. “This is the new thing that everybody is talking about.” That filters down into the newspapers, magazines, silly TV talk shows, etc., and then becomes the new thing that “everybody” is talking about.
I stand athwart this nonsense. I won’t play. I try hard not to use the hip new words and phrases.
What about these words?
“Woke”
“Cancel culture”
“Cultural marxism”
“Reverse racism”
“Virtue signaling”
Same basic idea, although some of those terms have been around for quite a while and don’t seem as recent / hip as the others.
“Diversity” has been around for centuries. I first picked up “virtue signaling” here.
I had a similar thought…
“War on Christmas”
“Mob”
“Snowflake”
“Blue Lives Matters”
“Elite”
“Trump Derangement Syndrome”
I suspect people with an axe to grind get on social media and say things like this. Then, a few people “like” it. When enough people “like” it, it becomes a “thing”….especially when someone famous or the media grabs it.