Tutorial Week 9: Trolling, Flame Wars, and Online Conflict

Based on previous lecture content, three primary categories of online conflict and harassment are identified: - Trolling. - Flaming. - E-bile.
Academic and Analytical Inquiries: - Identifying the specific differences that exist between trolling, flaming, and e-bile as distinct categories. - Evaluating whether these specific distinctions are useful for scholarly or practical analysis. - Investigating the conceptual differences between cyberbullying and trolling.

Perpetrator Narratives and External Descriptions: - Quotes from the E Safety Commission describe trolling activities as being "just a bit of fin." - Academic literature has historically and frequently framed the act of trolling as being "playful."
The Critique of Harm Minimization: - Emma A. Jane suggests that framing trolling as "playful" constitutes an attempt to minimize the severe harm associated with the behavior. - Trolling is often explicitly characterized by being: - Sexist. - Racist. - Homophobic.
Alternative Conceptualization: - Emma A. Jane introduces and utilizes the term "e-bile." - Scholarly debate exists regarding whether "e-bile" serves as a more accurate descriptor for the problem of online abuse than the term "trolling."

Connection to Affect Theory: - Theoretical investigation into trolling is connected to earlier course discussions regarding "affect" and feeling in online spaces.
Digital Specificity: - Central Question: Can trolling be understood as being based on a new type of affect that is unique and specific to digital society?
Historical Contextualization: - Investigation into whether there are identifiable pre-internet equivalencies to the modern phenomenon of trolling.

Functional Theory of Flaming: - The lecture addresses arguments from certain academics who posit that "flaming" may actually be beneficial for online communities.
Conflict and the Greater Good: - Critical Inquiry: Can the act of stoking conflict online ever be understood as being for the "greater good"?

Identity Politics in Digital Spaces: - Trolling is analyzed as a potential attempt to preserve the internet for its earliest and historically most prolific demographic: white American men.
Trolling as Power Maintenance: - Theoretical Consideration: Is trolling simply a tactical attempt to hold onto power as digital demographics shift and expand?

Scholarly Categorization: In the lecture, we discussed the difference between trolling, flaming, and e-bile. What are the differences between these categories? Are these distinctions useful?
Trolling vs. Bullying: Is there a difference between cyberbullying and trolling?
Emma A. Jane's Intervention: The quotes in the images are from the E Safety Commission. They describe trolling as "just a bit of fin." Academic literature frequently framed trolling as "playful." Is this, as Emma A. Jane suggests, an attempt to minimize the harm of trolling, which is often sexist, racist, and homophobic? Does her term "e-bile" more accurately describe this problem?
Affective Development: Earlier in this course, we talked about affect and feeling online. Can trolling be understood to be based on a new type of affect that is specific to digital society?
Historical Analysis: Are there pre-internet equivalencies to trolling?
Flaming for Community Health: In the lecture, it was mentioned that some academics argue that flaming might be good for online communities. What do you think of this claim? Can stoking conflict online ever be for the greater good?
Demographic Hegemony: To what extent can we understand trolling as an attempt to preserve the internet for its earliest and most prolific users, white American men? Is trolling simply an attempt to hold onto power?