talking to some of the worst people on the internet.

我過去三年的時間，

Now, if you've been online recently,

都在和網路上一些 最糟糕的人對談。

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

如果你最近上過網，

racist memes, misogynist propaganda, viral misinformation.

你可能會發現，網路上 有很多有害的垃圾：

So I wanted to know who was making this stuff.

種族主義的媒因、仇恨女性的 宣傳、瘋傳的錯誤資訊。

I wanted to understand how they were spreading it.

我想要知道幕後的黑手是誰， 他們怎麼散播這些資訊，

Ultimately, I wanted to know

最終，我想要知道這對 我們的社會會有什麼影響。

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,

追溯到製造這些資訊 或讓它們被瘋傳的人。

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

我會去接近這些人，說：「我是記者。 我能去看你做的事嗎？」

I'd approach those people and say,

通常得到的回應是： 「我為什麼會想要理會

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

住布魯克林，支持全球主義的 猶太佬娘娘腔，

Now, often the response would be,

且還是民主黨的同謀？」

"Why in hell would I want to talk to

（笑聲）

some low-t soy-boy Brooklyn globalist Jew cuck

對此，我的回應是：「聽著， 老兄，你說的只對了 57%。」

who's in cahoots with the Democrat Party?"

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

但，通常，我得到的 是相反的回應。

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

「好啊，過來吧。」

(Laughter)

所以這就是我為什麼最後會跑到

But often I got the opposite response.

南加州社交媒體網路推手 家中的客廳裡。

"Yeah, sure, come on by."

他是個已婚白種男子，近四十歲。

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

他前面有一張桌子， 上面有裝著咖啡的馬克杯、

of a social media propagandist in Southern California.

推特用的筆電、

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

傳訊息用的手機，

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

以及在 Periscope 和 YouTube 做直播用的 iPad。

a laptop for tweeting,

就這樣。

a phone for texting

但，有這些工具，

and an iPad for livestreaming to Periscope and YouTube.

他就能夠推動他那些 激進又有害的論點

That was it.

進入美國人對話的核心地帶。

And yet, with those tools,

比如，我在那裡的其中一天，

he was able to propel his fringe, noxious talking points

紐約有一顆炸彈爆炸，

into the heart of the American conversation.

被指控放置炸彈的人， 名字聽起來像是穆斯林。

For example, one of the days I was there,

對這位加州的社交推手來說， 這似乎是個機會，

a bomb had just exploded in New York,

因為他的期望之一， 就是讓美國拒絕所有的移民，

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

特別是從以穆斯林 為主的國家來的移民。

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

所以他開始直播，

because one of the things he wanted

讓他的追隨者逐步 激發出一股熱潮，

was for the US to cut off almost all immigration,

宣導說開放邊界的議程 會讓我們死光光，

especially from Muslim-majority countries.

並請他們發相關推文，

So he started livestreaming,

並使用特定的「#」標籤， 試圖讓那些關鍵字紅起來。

getting his followers worked up into a frenzy

而他們發的推文—— 數以百計的推文，

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

當中有許多都含有類似這樣的圖像。

and asking them to tweet about this,

這是喬治索羅斯。

and use specific hashtags,

他是匈牙利裔的 億萬富翁以及慈善家，

trying to get those hashtags trending.

在一些線上陰謀理論家的心中，

And tweet they did --

喬治索羅斯就像是 主張全球主義的大妖怪，

hundreds and hundreds of tweets,

是秘密操控所有 全球事務的少數菁英之一。

a lot of them featuring images like this one.

在這裡暫停一下：如果你覺得 這個想法聽起來很耳熟，

So that's George Soros.

有幾位掌控世界的菁英，

He's a Hungarian billionaire and philanthropist,

且多半剛好是有錢的猶太人，

and in the minds of some conspiracists online,

那是因為這是現存 最反猶太人的比喻之一。

George Soros is like a globalist bogeyman,

我也應該提一下， 在紐約放置炸彈的那個人，

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

他是美國公民。

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

所以不論他的理由是什麼，

that there are a few elites who control the world

移民都不是主要的議題。

and a lot of them happen to be rich Jews,

而加州的這位網路推手 很清楚知道這些。

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

他是個博學的人。 他其實是個律師。

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

他知道背後的事實，

he was an American citizen.

但他也知道事實無法 在網路上引起熱議。

So whatever else was going on there,

能在網路上引起熱議的，

immigration was not the main issue.

是情緒。

And the propagandist in California, he understood all this.

社交媒體的最初的初衷是 要將我們大家都集結起來，

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

讓世界更開放、更包容、更公平……

He knew the underlying facts,

它確實有做到一部分。

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

但社交媒體的演算法 在創造時就從來沒有

What drives conversation online

考量過如何分辨真偽，

is emotion.

什麼對社會好或不好，

See, the original premise of social media

什麼是親社會的，什麼是反社會的。

was that it was going to bring us all together,

那些演算法的目的就不是這些。

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

它們所做的，多半是 衡量你的參與程度：

And it did some of that.

點閱率、留言、 分享、轉推之類的。

But the social media algorithms have never been built

如果你希望你寫的內容 能得到大家參與，

to distinguish between what's true or false,

你的東西就得能煽動情緒，

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

明確來說，行為科學家稱 這類情緒為「高度亢奮」情緒。

That's just not what those algorithms do.

「高度亢奮」現象， 不是只有在性高潮時才有，

A lot of what they do is measure engagement:

很明顯地，網路上也會出現。

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

不論正面或負面，它指的是 任何能讓人心跳加速的東西。

And if you want your content to get engagement,

我和這些網路推手坐在一起，

it has to spark emotion,

除了加州的那傢伙， 還有數十個這種人，

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

我看著他們一而再再而三地 成功使出這些招數，

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

並不是因為他們是什麼 俄國駭客或科技奇才，

although it's the internet, obviously that works.

也不是因為他們有 獨特的政治洞見——

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

只因為他們了解 社交媒體如何運作，

So I would sit with these propagandists,

且他們是刻意利用這點來圖利自己。

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

一開始，我還可以告訴自己，

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

這只是跟網路有關的邊緣現象。

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

但，現在每件事都和網路有關了。

not because they had unique political insights --

這是在數個電視台播出的廣告，

just because they understood how social media worked,

在 2018 年國會選舉時播放，

and they were willing to exploit it to their advantage.

用非常少的證據就斷言 其中一位候選人

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

是國際操弄家喬治索羅斯的走狗，

something that was relegated to the internet.

並用很笨拙的修圖技巧 將他放在成疊的現金旁邊。

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

這是來自美國總統的推文， 同樣也沒有證據就斷言，

This is an ad that ran on multiple TV stations

說美國政治被喬治索羅斯操控。

during the 2018 congressional elections,

這種東西過去看起來 令人震驚但微不足道，

alleging with very little evidence that one of the candidates

老實說，是可以忽略的，

was in the pocket of international manipulator George Soros,

現在卻被正常化了，我們 幾乎不會注意到其氾濫的程度。

who is awkwardly photoshopped here next to stacks of cash.

所以，我花了三年在這個世界中。

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

我和很多人談過。

alleging, again with no evidence,

有些人似乎根本沒有核心信仰。

that American politics is being manipulated by George Soros.

他們就只是非常理性地想賭看看，

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

如果他們想在線上賺錢或得到關注，

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

他們就會盡可能地無法無天。

So I spent about three years in this world.

但，我和其他真正的 意識形態者談過。

I talked to a lot of people.

讓我說清楚，他們的意識形態 並非傳統的保守主義。

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

他們是想要取消女性投票權的人。

They just seemed to be betting, perfectly rationally,

他們是想要回到種族隔離的人。

that if they wanted to make some money online

當中有些人想要 把民主都一起廢除。

or get some attention online,

很顯然，這些人一點 也不相信這些事物。

they should just be as outrageous as possible.

他們在小學時沒有學到這些。

But I talked to other people who were true ideologues.

當中很多人，在他們進入 網路的超現實世界之前，

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

他們曾經是自由論者 或社會主義者，

These were people who wanted to revoke female suffrage.

或者曾經是完全不同的人。

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

那麼，發生了什麼事？

Some of them wanted to do away with democracy altogether.

我無法用一個說法代表所有案例，

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

但有很多與我交談過的人

They didn't pick them up in elementary school.

似乎都結合了高智商和低情緒智商。

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

他們似乎在暱名的 線上空間感到很自在，

they had been libertarian or they had been socialist

而不是真實世界的連結。

or they had been something else entirely.

所以，他們會退到這些 討論區或者各種論壇，

So what was going on?

在那些地方，他們 最糟糕的衝動會被放大。

Well, I can't generalize about every case,

他們一開始可能只是 開個下流玩笑，

but a lot of the people I spoke to,

接著，他們會從那個笑話 得到很多積極的支持，

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

得到好多無意義的 所謂「網路分數」，

They seem to take comfort in anonymous, online spaces

讓他們開始相信他們自己的玩笑。

rather than connecting in the real world.

我曾和一位年輕女子談了很多， 她在新澤西長大，

So often they would retreat to these message boards

高中畢業之後， 她搬到了一個新地方，

or these subreddits,

突然，她感到疏遠、孤獨，

where their worst impulses would be magnified.

開始退縮到她的手機當中。

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

她在網路上找到空間，

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

在那裡，大家會講一些 最驚人、令人髮指的事。

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

她發現這些內容真的讓人厭惡，

that they might start believing their own joke.

但卻也有點引人入勝，

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

很難把視線從它們身上移開。

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

她開始在這些 網路空間中和人互動，

and suddenly she just felt alienated and cut off

他們讓她覺得自己 很聰明、有人肯定。

and started retreating into her phone.

她開始有了共同體的感覺，

She found some of these spaces on the internet

並開始思考，這些驚人的 媒因當中可能有些

where people would post the most shocking, heinous things.

真的是從真相發展出來的。

And she found this stuff really off-putting

幾個月後，她和一些 新網友共乘一台車，

but also kind of engrossing,

前往維吉尼亞的夏律第鎮，

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

打算以白人種族之名， 帶著火把遊行。

She started interacting with people in these online spaces,

幾個月的時間， 她就從歐巴馬支持者

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

變成了激進的白人至上主義者。

She started feeling a sense of community,

在她這個特殊案例中，

started wondering if maybe some of these shocking memes

她其實自己有能力可以找到方法 來擺脫白人至上的崇拜。

might actually contain a kernel of truth.

但和我談過話的許多人並沒有。

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

讓我說清楚：

headed to Charlottesville, Virginia,

我從來沒有如此深信

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

我必須要和我交談的每個人 都找到共同點，

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

我甚至願意說： 「你知道嗎，老兄，

to fully radicalized white supremacist.

你是法西斯主義宣傳者，我不是，

Now, in her particular case,

不論如何，咱們抱一下就沒事了， 我們的歧見都會消失。」

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

不，絕對不可能。

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

但我的確相信， 我們無法忽視這個狀況。

And just to be clear:

我們要試著了解它， 因為只有透過了解它，

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

我們才能開始預防它。

with every single person I spoke to

我待在這個世界中的三年期間， 我接到幾通很糟糕的電話，

that I was willing to say,

甚至威脅，

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

但和女性記者所碰到的相比 這只是冰山一角。

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

是的，我是猶太人，

No, absolutely not.

不過，很奇怪的是， 很多納粹無法看出我是猶太人，

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

坦白說我覺得有點失望。

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

（笑聲）

can we even start to inoculate ourselves against it.

說真的，你們這些人 全心全意在反猶太人啊。

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

我沒有什麼地方會露餡 讓你們看出來嗎？

even some threats,

都沒有嗎？

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

（笑聲）

And yeah, I am Jewish,

這不是秘密。

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

我的名字叫安德魯馬蘭茲， 我為《紐約客》撰文，

which I frankly just found kind of disappointing.

我的人格類型就像是《歡樂單身派對》

(Laughter)

在公園坡食品合作社錄影的那一集。

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

都沒有嗎？

Nothing about me is tipping you off at all?

（笑聲）

Nothing?

總之——最終，

(Laughter)

如果能有簡單的方程式 來說明就好了：

This is not a secret.

手機＋孤獨孩子＝ 12% 機會成為納粹。

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

很顯然沒那麼簡單。

my personality type is like if a Seinfeld episode

我寫作時，

was taped at the Park Slope Food Coop.

我偏好做描述， 而不是提解決方案。

Nothing?

不過這裡是 TED，

(Laughter)

所以咱們實際點。

Anyway, look -- ultimately, it would be nice

我想要分享幾個建議，

if there were, like, a simple formula:

是你我這種網路公民可以做的事，

smartphone plus alienated kid equals 12 percent chance of Nazi.

能夠讓一切變得比較不那麼有害。

It's obviously not that simple.

第一，要當聰明的懷疑論者。

And in my writing,

我認為懷疑論有兩種。

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

在這裡我不想談到 太技術面的認識論資訊，

But this is TED,

但我把它們稱為 聰明懷疑論和愚蠢懷疑論。

so let's get practical.

所以，聰明懷疑論：

I want to share a few suggestions

獨立思考、質疑每一項主張、

of things that citizens of the internet like you and I

索求證據——

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

很好，那是真的懷疑論。

So the first one is to be a smart skeptic.

愚蠢懷疑論： 它聽起來像是懷疑論，

So, I think there are two kinds of skepticism.

但它比較像是下意識的叛逆吐槽。

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

大家都說地球是圓的，

but I call them smart and dumb skepticism.

你就說它是平的。

So, smart skepticism:

大家都說種族主義不好，

thinking for yourself,

你就說：「我不知道， 我對這點抱持懷疑。」

questioning every claim,

在我過去幾年交談過的 白種年輕男性當中有相當多

demanding evidence --

都會說：

great, that's real skepticism.

「要知道，媒體、我的老師， 他們都試著要灌輸我，

Dumb skepticism: it sounds like skepticism,

強迫我相信男性特權和白人特權，

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

但我不確定，老兄， 我不這麼認為。」

Everyone says the earth is round,

各位——世界上叛逆的白人青少年——

you say it's flat.

聽著：

Everyone says racism is bad,

如果你懷疑地球不是圓的、 懷疑男性特權、

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

種族主義是好的，

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

你並不是懷疑論者， 你只是個蠢蛋。

who have said,

（掌聲）

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

有獨立見解是好的， 我們都應該有獨立見解，

into believing in male privilege and white privilege,

但這麼做時要放聰明點。

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

下一個建議和自由言論有關。

Guys -- contrarian white teens of the world --

你會聽到聰明、有教養的人說： 「我是支持自由言論的。」

look:

他們說的方式， 就好像他們是在解決辯論，

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

但那明明是一段有意義的對談 正要開始的時候。

and a racism is bad skeptic,

有趣的事都會發生在 這個時點之後。

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

好，你支持自由言論。 那是什麼意思？

(Applause)

那是否表示大衛杜克 和理查德斯賓塞

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

必須得激活推特帳號？

but just be smart about it.

是否表示任何人都可以 用任何理由在線上騷擾任何人？

So this next one is about free speech.

我看過今年度完整的 TED 講者名單。

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

沒有找到任何圓形地球懷疑論者。

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

這違反了自由言論的標準嗎？

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

我們都支持自由言論，這是好事，

All the interesting stuff happens after that point.

但如果你就只知道 一而再再而三地那樣說，

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

你其實在阻礙更有成效的對談。

Does it mean that David Duke and Richard Spencer

讓高尚文雅的行為 再次成為很酷的事，所以……

need to have active Twitter accounts?

好極了！