Inside the bizarre world of internet trolls and propagandists | Andrew Marantz

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: 易帆 余

I spent the past three years

我過去三年的時間，

talking to some of the worst people on the internet.

都在和網路上一些 最糟糕的人對談。

Now, if you've been online recently,

如果你最近上過網，

you may have noticed that there's a lot of toxic garbage out there:

你可能會發現，網路上 有很多有害的垃圾：

racist memes, misogynist propaganda, viral misinformation.

種族主義的媒因、仇恨女性的 宣傳、瘋傳的錯誤資訊。

So I wanted to know who was making this stuff.

我想要知道幕後的黑手是誰， 他們怎麼散播這些資訊，

I wanted to understand how they were spreading it.

最終，我想要知道這對 我們的社會會有什麼影響。

Ultimately, I wanted to know

what kind of impact it might be having on our society.

所以，2016 年，我開始 追蹤這些媒因的源頭，

So in 2016, I started tracing some of these memes back to their source,

back to the people who were making them or who were making them go viral.

追溯到製造這些資訊 或讓它們被瘋傳的人。

I'd approach those people and say,

我會去接近這些人，說：「我是記者。 我能去看你做的事嗎？」

"Hey, I'm a journalist. Can I come watch you do what you do?"

通常得到的回應是： 「我為什麼會想要理會

Now, often the response would be,

"Why in hell would I want to talk to

住布魯克林，支持全球主義的 猶太佬娘娘腔，

some low-t soy-boy Brooklyn globalist Jew cuck

who's in cahoots with the Democrat Party?"

且還是民主黨的同謀？」

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

To which my response would be, "Look, man, that's only 57 percent true."

對此，我的回應是：「聽著， 老兄，你說的只對了 57%。」

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

But often I got the opposite response.

但，通常，我得到的 是相反的回應。

"Yeah, sure, come on by."

「好啊，過來吧。」

So that's how I ended up in the living room

所以這就是我為什麼最後會跑到

of a social media propagandist in Southern California.

南加州社交媒體網路推手 家中的客廳裡。

He was a married white guy in his late 30s.

他是個已婚白種男子，近四十歲。

He had a table in front of him with a mug of coffee,

他前面有一張桌子， 上面有裝著咖啡的馬克杯、

a laptop for tweeting,

推特用的筆電、

a phone for texting

傳訊息用的手機，

and an iPad for livestreaming to Periscope and YouTube.

以及在 Periscope 和 YouTube 做直播用的 iPad。

That was it.

就這樣。

And yet, with those tools,

但，有這些工具，

he was able to propel his fringe, noxious talking points

他就能夠推動他那些 激進又有害的論點

into the heart of the American conversation.

進入美國人對話的核心地帶。

For example, one of the days I was there,

比如，我在那裡的其中一天，

a bomb had just exploded in New York,

紐約有一顆炸彈爆炸，

and the guy accused of planting the bomb had a Muslim-sounding name.

被指控放置炸彈的人， 名字聽起來像是穆斯林。

Now, to the propagandist in California, this seemed like an opportunity,

對這位加州的社交推手來說， 這似乎是個機會，

because one of the things he wanted

因為他的期望之一， 就是讓美國拒絕所有的移民，

was for the US to cut off almost all immigration,

especially from Muslim-majority countries.

特別是從以穆斯林 為主的國家來的移民。

So he started livestreaming,

所以他開始直播，

getting his followers worked up into a frenzy

讓他的追隨者逐步 激發出一股熱潮，

about how the open borders agenda was going to kill us all

宣導說開放邊界的議程 會讓我們死光光，

and asking them to tweet about this,

並請他們發相關推文，

and use specific hashtags,

並使用特定的「#」標籤， 試圖讓那些關鍵字紅起來。

trying to get those hashtags trending.

And tweet they did --

而他們發的推文—— 數以百計的推文，

hundreds and hundreds of tweets,

a lot of them featuring images like this one.

當中有許多都含有類似這樣的圖像。

So that's George Soros.

這是喬治索羅斯。

He's a Hungarian billionaire and philanthropist,

他是匈牙利裔的 億萬富翁以及慈善家，

and in the minds of some conspiracists online,

在一些線上陰謀理論家的心中，

George Soros is like a globalist bogeyman,

喬治索羅斯就像是 主張全球主義的大妖怪，

one of a few elites who is secretly manipulating all of global affairs.

是秘密操控所有 全球事務的少數菁英之一。

Now, just to pause here: if this idea sounds familiar to you,

在這裡暫停一下：如果你覺得 這個想法聽起來很耳熟，

that there are a few elites who control the world

有幾位掌控世界的菁英，

and a lot of them happen to be rich Jews,

且多半剛好是有錢的猶太人，

that's because it is one of the most anti-Semitic tropes in existence.

那是因為這是現存 最反猶太人的比喻之一。

I should also mention that the guy in New York who planted that bomb,

我也應該提一下， 在紐約放置炸彈的那個人，

he was an American citizen.

他是美國公民。

So whatever else was going on there,

所以不論他的理由是什麼，

immigration was not the main issue.

移民都不是主要的議題。

And the propagandist in California, he understood all this.

而加州的這位網路推手 很清楚知道這些。

他是個博學的人。 他其實是個律師。

He was a well-read guy. He was actually a lawyer.

He knew the underlying facts,

他知道背後的事實，

but he also knew that facts do not drive conversation online.

但他也知道事實無法 在網路上引起熱議。

What drives conversation online

能在網路上引起熱議的，

is emotion.

是情緒。

See, the original premise of social media

社交媒體的最初的初衷是 要將我們大家都集結起來，

was that it was going to bring us all together,

make the world more open and tolerant and fair ...

讓世界更開放、更包容、更公平……

And it did some of that.

它確實有做到一部分。

But the social media algorithms have never been built

但社交媒體的演算法 在創造時就從來沒有

to distinguish between what's true or false,

考量過如何分辨真偽，

what's good or bad for society, what's prosocial and what's antisocial.

什麼對社會好或不好，

什麼是親社會的，什麼是反社會的。

That's just not what those algorithms do.

那些演算法的目的就不是這些。

A lot of what they do is measure engagement:

它們所做的，多半是 衡量你的參與程度：

clicks, comments, shares, retweets, that kind of thing.

點閱率、留言、 分享、轉推之類的。

And if you want your content to get engagement,

如果你希望你寫的內容 能得到大家參與，

it has to spark emotion,

你的東西就得能煽動情緒，

specifically, what behavioral scientists call "high-arousal emotion."

明確來說，行為科學家稱 這類情緒為「高度亢奮」情緒。

Now, "high arousal" doesn't only mean sexual arousal,

「高度亢奮」現象， 不是只有在性高潮時才有，

although it's the internet, obviously that works.

很明顯地，網路上也會出現。

It means anything, positive or negative, that gets people's hearts pumping.

不論正面或負面，它指的是 任何能讓人心跳加速的東西。

So I would sit with these propagandists,

我和這些網路推手坐在一起，

not just the guy in California, but dozens of them,

除了加州的那傢伙， 還有數十個這種人，

and I would watch as they did this again and again successfully,

我看著他們一而再再而三地 成功使出這些招數，

not because they were Russian hackers, not because they were tech prodigies,

並不是因為他們是什麼 俄國駭客或科技奇才，

not because they had unique political insights --

也不是因為他們有 獨特的政治洞見——

just because they understood how social media worked,

只因為他們了解 社交媒體如何運作，

and they were willing to exploit it to their advantage.

且他們是刻意利用這點來圖利自己。

Now, at first I was able to tell myself this was a fringe phenomenon,

一開始，我還可以告訴自己，

這只是跟網路有關的邊緣現象。

something that was relegated to the internet.

But there's really no separation anymore between the internet and everything else.

但，現在每件事都和網路有關了。

This is an ad that ran on multiple TV stations

這是在數個電視台播出的廣告，

during the 2018 congressional elections,

在 2018 年國會選舉時播放，

alleging with very little evidence that one of the candidates

用非常少的證據就斷言 其中一位候選人

was in the pocket of international manipulator George Soros,

是國際操弄家喬治索羅斯的走狗，

who is awkwardly photoshopped here next to stacks of cash.

並用很笨拙的修圖技巧 將他放在成疊的現金旁邊。

This is a tweet from the President of the United States,

這是來自美國總統的推文， 同樣也沒有證據就斷言，

alleging, again with no evidence,

that American politics is being manipulated by George Soros.

說美國政治被喬治索羅斯操控。

This stuff that once seemed so shocking and marginal and, frankly, just ignorable,

這種東西過去看起來 令人震驚但微不足道，

老實說，是可以忽略的，

it's now so normalized that we hardly even notice it.

現在卻被正常化了，我們 幾乎不會注意到其氾濫的程度。

So I spent about three years in this world.

所以，我花了三年在這個世界中。

I talked to a lot of people.

我和很多人談過。

Some of them seemed to have no core beliefs at all.

有些人似乎根本沒有核心信仰。

They just seemed to be betting, perfectly rationally,

他們就只是非常理性地想賭看看，

that if they wanted to make some money online

如果他們想在線上賺錢或得到關注，

or get some attention online,

他們就會盡可能地無法無天。

they should just be as outrageous as possible.

But I talked to other people who were true ideologues.

但，我和其他真正的 意識形態者談過。

And to be clear, their ideology was not traditional conservatism.

讓我說清楚，他們的意識形態 並非傳統的保守主義。

These were people who wanted to revoke female suffrage.

他們是想要取消女性投票權的人。

These were people who wanted to go back to racial segregation.

他們是想要回到種族隔離的人。

Some of them wanted to do away with democracy altogether.

當中有些人想要 把民主都一起廢除。

Now, obviously these people were not born believing these things.

很顯然，這些人一點 也不相信這些事物。

They didn't pick them up in elementary school.

他們在小學時沒有學到這些。

A lot of them, before they went down some internet rabbit hole,

當中很多人，在他們進入 網路的超現實世界之前，

they had been libertarian or they had been socialist

他們曾經是自由論者 或社會主義者，

or they had been something else entirely.

或者曾經是完全不同的人。

So what was going on?

那麼，發生了什麼事？

Well, I can't generalize about every case,

我無法用一個說法代表所有案例，

but a lot of the people I spoke to,

但有很多與我交談過的人

they seem to have a combination of a high IQ and a low EQ.

似乎都結合了高智商和低情緒智商。

They seem to take comfort in anonymous, online spaces

他們似乎在暱名的 線上空間感到很自在，

rather than connecting in the real world.

而不是真實世界的連結。

So often they would retreat to these message boards

所以，他們會退到這些 討論區或者各種論壇，

or these subreddits,

where their worst impulses would be magnified.

在那些地方，他們 最糟糕的衝動會被放大。

They might start out saying something just as a sick joke,

他們一開始可能只是 開個下流玩笑，

and then they would get so much positive reinforcement for that joke,

接著，他們會從那個笑話 得到很多積極的支持，

so many meaningless "internet points," as they called it,

得到好多無意義的 所謂「網路分數」，

that they might start believing their own joke.

讓他們開始相信他們自己的玩笑。

I talked a lot with one young woman who grew up in New Jersey,

我曾和一位年輕女子談了很多， 她在新澤西長大，

and then after high school, she moved to a new place

高中畢業之後， 她搬到了一個新地方，

突然，她感到疏遠、孤獨，

and suddenly she just felt alienated and cut off

and started retreating into her phone.

開始退縮到她的手機當中。

She found some of these spaces on the internet

她在網路上找到空間，

where people would post the most shocking, heinous things.

在那裡，大家會講一些 最驚人、令人髮指的事。

And she found this stuff really off-putting

她發現這些內容真的讓人厭惡，

but also kind of engrossing,

但卻也有點引人入勝，

kind of like she couldn't look away from it.

很難把視線從它們身上移開。

She started interacting with people in these online spaces,

她開始在這些 網路空間中和人互動，

他們讓她覺得自己 很聰明、有人肯定。

and they made her feel smart, they made her feel validated.

她開始有了共同體的感覺，

She started feeling a sense of community,

started wondering if maybe some of these shocking memes

並開始思考，這些驚人的 媒因當中可能有些

might actually contain a kernel of truth.

真的是從真相發展出來的。

A few months later, she was in a car with some of her new internet friends

幾個月後，她和一些 新網友共乘一台車，

headed to Charlottesville, Virginia,

前往維吉尼亞的夏律第鎮，

to march with torches in the name of the white race.

打算以白人種族之名， 帶著火把遊行。

She'd gone, in a few months, from Obama supporter

幾個月的時間， 她就從歐巴馬支持者

to fully radicalized white supremacist.

變成了激進的白人至上主義者。

Now, in her particular case,

在她這個特殊案例中，

she actually was able to find her way out of the cult of white supremacy.

她其實自己有能力可以找到方法 來擺脫白人至上的崇拜。

But a lot of the people I spoke to were not.

但和我談過話的許多人並沒有。

And just to be clear:

讓我說清楚：

I was never so convinced that I had to find common ground

我從來沒有如此深信

我必須要和我交談的每個人 都找到共同點，

with every single person I spoke to

that I was willing to say,

我甚至願意說： 「你知道嗎，老兄，

"You know what, man, you're a fascist propagandist, I'm not,

你是法西斯主義宣傳者，我不是，

whatever, let's just hug it out, all our differences will melt away."

不論如何，咱們抱一下就沒事了， 我們的歧見都會消失。」

No, absolutely not.

不，絕對不可能。

But I did become convinced that we cannot just look away from this stuff.

但我的確相信， 我們無法忽視這個狀況。

We have to try to understand it, because only by understanding it

我們要試著了解它， 因為只有透過了解它，

can we even start to inoculate ourselves against it.

我們才能開始預防它。

In my three years in this world, I got a few nasty phone calls,

我待在這個世界中的三年期間， 我接到幾通很糟糕的電話，

even some threats,

甚至威脅，

but it wasn't a fraction of what female journalists get on this beat.

但和女性記者所碰到的相比 這只是冰山一角。

And yeah, I am Jewish,

是的，我是猶太人，

although, weirdly, a lot of the Nazis couldn't tell I was Jewish,

不過，很奇怪的是， 很多納粹無法看出我是猶太人，

which I frankly just found kind of disappointing.

坦白說我覺得有點失望。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Seriously, like, your whole job is being a professional anti-Semite.

說真的，你們這些人 全心全意在反猶太人啊。

Nothing about me is tipping you off at all?

我沒有什麼地方會露餡 讓你們看出來嗎？

Nothing?

都沒有嗎？

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

This is not a secret.

這不是秘密。

My name is Andrew Marantz, I write for "The New Yorker,"

我的名字叫安德魯馬蘭茲， 我為《紐約客》撰文，

my personality type is like if a Seinfeld episode

我的人格類型就像是《歡樂單身派對》

was taped at the Park Slope Food Coop.

在公園坡食品合作社錄影的那一集。

Nothing?

都沒有嗎？

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Anyway, look -- ultimately, it would be nice

總之——最終，

如果能有簡單的方程式 來說明就好了：

if there were, like, a simple formula:

smartphone plus alienated kid equals 12 percent chance of Nazi.

手機＋孤獨孩子＝ 12% 機會成為納粹。

It's obviously not that simple.

很顯然沒那麼簡單。

And in my writing,

我寫作時，

I'm much more comfortable being descriptive, not prescriptive.

我偏好做描述， 而不是提解決方案。

But this is TED,

不過這裡是 TED，

so let's get practical.

所以咱們實際點。

I want to share a few suggestions

我想要分享幾個建議，

of things that citizens of the internet like you and I

是你我這種網路公民可以做的事，

might be able to do to make things a little bit less toxic.

能夠讓一切變得比較不那麼有害。

So the first one is to be a smart skeptic.

第一，要當聰明的懷疑論者。

So, I think there are two kinds of skepticism.

我認為懷疑論有兩種。

And I don't want to drown you in technical epistemological information here,

在這裡我不想談到 太技術面的認識論資訊，

but I call them smart and dumb skepticism.

但我把它們稱為 聰明懷疑論和愚蠢懷疑論。

So, smart skepticism:

所以，聰明懷疑論：

thinking for yourself,

獨立思考、質疑每一項主張、

questioning every claim,

demanding evidence --

索求證據——

great, that's real skepticism.

很好，那是真的懷疑論。

Dumb skepticism: it sounds like skepticism,

愚蠢懷疑論： 它聽起來像是懷疑論，

but it's actually closer to knee-jerk contrarianism.

但它比較像是下意識的叛逆吐槽。

Everyone says the earth is round,

大家都說地球是圓的，

you say it's flat.

你就說它是平的。

Everyone says racism is bad,

大家都說種族主義不好，

you say, "I dunno, I'm skeptical about that."

你就說：「我不知道， 我對這點抱持懷疑。」

I cannot tell you how many young white men I have spoken to in the last few years

在我過去幾年交談過的 白種年輕男性當中有相當多

who have said,

都會說：

"You know, the media, my teachers, they're all trying to indoctrinate me

「要知道，媒體、我的老師， 他們都試著要灌輸我，

into believing in male privilege and white privilege,

強迫我相信男性特權和白人特權，

but I don't know about that, man, I don't think so."

但我不確定，老兄， 我不這麼認為。」

Guys -- contrarian white teens of the world --

各位——世界上叛逆的白人青少年——

look:

聽著：

if you are being a round earth skeptic and a male privilege skeptic

如果你懷疑地球不是圓的、 懷疑男性特權、

and a racism is bad skeptic,

種族主義是好的，

you're not being a skeptic, you're being a jerk.

你並不是懷疑論者， 你只是個蠢蛋。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

It's great to be independent-minded, we all should be independent-minded,

有獨立見解是好的， 我們都應該有獨立見解，

but just be smart about it.

但這麼做時要放聰明點。

So this next one is about free speech.

下一個建議和自由言論有關。

You will hear smart, accomplished people who will say, "Well, I'm pro-free speech,"

你會聽到聰明、有教養的人說： 「我是支持自由言論的。」

and they say it in this way that it's like they're settling a debate,

他們說的方式， 就好像他們是在解決辯論，

when actually, that is the very beginning of any meaningful conversation.

但那明明是一段有意義的對談 正要開始的時候。

All the interesting stuff happens after that point.

有趣的事都會發生在 這個時點之後。

OK, you're pro-free speech. What does that mean?

好，你支持自由言論。 那是什麼意思？

Does it mean that David Duke and Richard Spencer

那是否表示大衛杜克 和理查德斯賓塞

need to have active Twitter accounts?

必須得激活推特帳號？

Does it mean that anyone can harass anyone else online

是否表示任何人都可以 用任何理由在線上騷擾任何人？

for any reason?

You know, I looked through the entire list of TED speakers this year.

我看過今年度完整的 TED 講者名單。

沒有找到任何圓形地球懷疑論者。

I didn't find a single round earth skeptic.

Is that a violation of free speech norms?

這違反了自由言論的標準嗎？

Look, we're all pro-free speech, it's wonderful to be pro-free speech,

我們都支持自由言論，這是好事，

but if that's all you know how to say again and again,

但如果你就只知道 一而再再而三地那樣說，

you're standing in the way of a more productive conversation.

你其實在阻礙更有成效的對談。

Making decency cool again, so ...

讓高尚文雅的行為 再次成為很酷的事，所以……

Great!

好極了！

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Yeah. I don't even need to explain it.

我甚至不用解釋。

So in my research, I would go to Reddit or YouTube or Facebook,

在我做研究時，我會上 Reddit 或 YouTube 或臉書，

and I would search for "sharia law"

我會搜尋「伊斯蘭教教法」，

or I would search for "the Holocaust,"

或者我會搜尋「大屠殺」，

and you might be able to guess what the algorithms showed me, right?

你們應該猜得到演算法 會呈現什麼給我，對吧？

"Is sharia law sweeping across the United States?"

「伊斯蘭教教法是否 橫掃美國全境？」

"Did the Holocaust really happen?"

「大屠殺真的有發生嗎？」

Dumb skepticism.

愚蠢的懷疑論者。

So we've ended up in this bizarre dynamic online,

所以，最後在線上就產生了 這種怪異的網路現象，

where some people see bigoted propaganda

有些人會把偏執的推文視為

as being edgy or being dangerous and cool,

前衛的、危險又酷的，

and people see basic truth and human decency as pearl-clutching

對基本真理和人類的合宜行為

卻大驚小怪，

or virtue-signaling or just boring.

或暗示美德很無聊。

And the social media algorithms, whether intentionally or not,

不論有意或無意，社交媒體演算法

they have incentivized this,

都在鼓勵這些事，

because bigoted propaganda is great for engagement.

因為偏執的宣傳很吸睛。

Everyone clicks on it, everyone comments on it,

大家都會點擊，大家都會留言，

whether they love it or they hate it.

不論他們討厭或喜歡該論點。

So the number one thing that has to happen here

所以，必須要達成的第一件事，

is social networks need to fix their platforms.

就是社交媒體得要 修改它們的平台。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

So if you're listening to my voice and you work at a social media company

如果你在聽我的演說， 且你在社交媒體公司工作，

or you invest in one or, I don't know, own one,

或者你有投資或擁有這類公司，

this tip is for you.

這項告誡是給你的。

If you have been optimizing for maximum emotional engagement

如果你一直在優化 會煽動情緒的內容或影片，

and maximum emotional engagement turns out to be actively harming the world,

而結果發現煽動情緒 實際上會傷害到這個世界，

it's time to optimize for something else.

是時候要優化其它 有意義的事情了。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

But in addition to putting pressure on them to do that

但，除了施壓讓他們去做

and waiting for them and hoping that they'll do that,

並且等待著希望他們會去做之外，

there's some stuff that the rest of us can do, too.

還有我們其他人也能做的事。

So, we can create some better pathways or suggest some better pathways

我們可以創造或建議更好的途徑

for angsty teens to go down.

給煩惱的青少年去走。

If you see something that you think is really creative and thoughtful

若你發現了什麼真的 很有創意和巧思的東西，

and you want to share that thing, you can share that thing,

且你想要分享，那就去分享，

即使它沒有讓你充滿高度興奮的情緒。

even if it's not flooding you with high arousal emotion.

我知道，這是非常微小的一步，

Now that is a very small step, I realize,

但，加總起來，是會有影響的，

but in the aggregate, this stuff does matter,

because these algorithms, as powerful as they are,

因為這些演算法雖然很強大，

they are taking their behavioral cues from us.

它們會怎麼做，還是來自於我們。

So let me leave you with this.

我想留給大家思考的是：

You know, a few years ago it was really fashionable

幾年前，很時髦的人會說

to say that the internet was a revolutionary tool

網路是很革命性的工具，

that was going to bring us all together.

可以把大家聚集在一起。

It's now more fashionable to say

現在，時髦的人會說

that the internet is a huge, irredeemable dumpster fire.

網路是不可救藥的大災難。

Neither caricature is really true.

兩種誇張說法都不全對。

We know the internet is just too vast and complex

我們知道網路太浩大、太複雜， 不可能是全好或全壞的。

to be all good or all bad.

And the danger with these ways of thinking,

這些思考方式的危險在於，

whether it's the utopian view that the internet will inevitably save us

不論是認為網路最終一定會 拯救我們的烏托邦觀點，

or the dystopian view that it will inevitably destroy us,

或者它最終一定會摧毀 我們的反烏托邦觀點，

either way, we're letting ourselves off the hook.

不管怎樣，我們要讓自己擺脫困境。

There is nothing inevitable about our future.

我們的未來沒有什麼是不可避免的。

The internet is made of people.

網路是人構成的。

People make decisions at social media companies.

是人，在社交媒體公司做決定。

People make hashtags trend or not trend.

是人，讓 # 成為潮流或不流行。

People make societies progress or regress.

是人，讓社會進步或退步。

When we internalize that fact,

一旦我們能內化這事實，

we can stop waiting for some inevitable future to arrive

就可以停止等著 某種無可避免的未來發生，

and actually get to work now.

而真的現在就開始行動。

You know, we've all been taught that the arc of the moral universe is long

我們都聽過，道德宇宙的 弧形軌跡很漫長，

但它終將彎向正義。

but that it bends toward justice.

Maybe.

也許。

Maybe it will.

也許會吧。

But that has always been an aspiration.

但那只是鼓舞，

It is not a guarantee.

而不是保證。

The arc doesn't bend itself.

道德軌跡並不會自己轉向。

It's not bent inevitably by some mysterious force.

它不會被某種神秘力量改變方向。

The real truth,

真正的真相，其實比較可怕

which is scarier and also more liberating,

但也讓人放心，那就是：

is that we bend it.

我們能夠改變它。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）