When the news began breaking that Sony was being threatened by North Korean hackers over its Seth-Rogen-and-James-Franco-starring, North-Korean-leader-assassinating comedy The Interview, I had one thought: “This is James Franco’s best performance art piece yet.”
And then the seemingly unthinkable happened: Sony actually pulled the film from theaters. To a movie studio, that’s a full-on financial surrender. The impact was immediate, and widely reported on. Sony would lose tens of millions. Filmgoers would miss a highly anticipated comedy with two huge stars. And the U.S. was suddenly finding itself “negotiating with terrorists” in arguably the weirdest way in its history.
But beyond these first-blush costs, The Interview cancellation has deeper, more alarming consequences for all of us. That’s because it exacerbates several negative trends. First and foremost, it erodes confidence in one of the last remaining, truly public spaces. Movie theaters are one of the few remaining places strangers from every social stratum gather to laugh, cry, and pay $18 for a box of Jujubes. Scaring people away from theaters only furthers our already increasing tendency to stay at home and get our entertainment there. Going to the movies, their artistic merits aside, act as a psychological balm for our real-world fears of terrorism and international calamity. Whether it’s Liam Neeson having yet something else taken from him, or the latest tights-clad superhero facing a global menace, at movies we can dream of “our side” winning alongside the members of our “team.” With a big source of that solace rattled, will we start channeling those anxieties elsewhere? The makers of Xanax certainly hope so.
From a creative standpoint, the hackers’ blow does no favors for the already-uphill battle for originality in Hollywood. Full disclosure: I haven’t seen The Interview (and not just due to my undying adoration of our Dear Leader Kim if he’s reading this), but I do know the screenwriter, and his work is brilliant and original. So here’s yet another shame: The North Korean gambit will rattle an already highly risk-averse Hollywood into steering even further into its formula of familiarity: remakes, reboots, and franchises. Although maybe this problem could contain its own solution: Six years from now, maybe Sony will be ready to make a remake of The Interview?
[quote position="full" is_quote="true"]A week ago, our culture was consumed with gossip about misbehaving Sony executives sending petty emails to one another. Today, we’re all thinking about other countries and a globe filled with conflicts in need of solving.[/quote]
If a big-budget movie disappears and nobody sees it, can it still have a Hollywood ending? Not likely, but perhaps there are a few positive things that could emerge from the brouhaha—that is, if we are prepared to take advantage.
For one thing, The Interview backlash illustrates the real world impact of pop culture more than any film since 1997’s Wag the Dog. A week ago, our culture was consumed with gossip about misbehaving Sony executives sending petty emails to one another. Today, we’re all thinking about other countries and a globe filled with conflicts in need of solving.
And across social media, I have seen countless critics, celebrities, and spambots on Twitter unanimously assailing Sony’s cancellation and leaping to the filmmakers’ defense. Even the snarkiest of hipsters who wouldn’t be caught dead in a theater for a major studio release are feeling the sting of free expression curtailed and are speaking up about it. That kind of outrage can be inspiring to both artists and the public and I look forward to what kind of ballsy art emerges from it. Or at the very least, a rash of indie projects about short, fat, giant-ladies-sunglass-wearing dictators. And who knows—maybe in one of these he really will be played by James Franco?
A young girl plays with a magnifying glass during a fiel tripCanva
A young girl feeds a cow Canva
Reddit commentReddit | u/AmbitiousPirate5159 
Young students get on the bus for a field tripCanva
Traffic sign.Image via 
Family shopping and single man ironing.Image via 
Multicultural young people having fun with a mobile phone.Image via 
Looking at a complicated market.Image via 
Ultrasound of human baby.Image via 
IVF animated process.Image via 
A couple speaks with a fertility professional.Image via 
Why do some folks use social media but don't engage?
Psychologist says people who never comment on social media share these 5 positive traits
For over 20 years, social media has developed into a staple in many people’s day-to-day lives. Whether it’s to keep in communication with friends and family, following the thoughts of celebrities, or watching cat videos while sipping your morning coffee, there seem to be two types of social media users: commenters and lurkers.
The term “lurker” sounds equally mysterious and insidious, with some social media users writing them off as non-participants at best or voyeurs at worst. However, mindfulness expert Lachlan Brown believes these non-commenters have some very psychologically positive and healthy traits. Let’s take a look at how each one of these traits could be beneficial and see how fruitful lurking might be even though it can drive content creators crazy.
1. Cautious about vulnerability
Consciously or not, making a post online or commenting on one puts you and your words out there. It’s a statement that everyone can see, even if it’s as simple as clicking “like.” Doing so opens yourself up to judgment, with all the good, bad, and potential misinterpretation that comes with it. Non-commenters would rather not open themselves up to that.
These silent users are connected to a concept of self-protection by simply not engaging. By just scrolling past posts or just reading/watching them without commentary, they’re preventing themselves from any downsides of sharing an opinion such as rejection, misunderstanding, or embarrassment. They also have more control on how much of themselves they’re willing to reveal to the general public, and tend to be more open face-to-face or during one-on-one/one-on-few private chats or DMs. This can be seen as a healthy boundary and prevents unnecessary exposure.
Considering many comment sections, especially involving political topics, are meant to stir negative emotional responses to increase engagement, being extra mindful about where, when, and what you comment might not be a bad idea. They might not even take the engagement bait at all. Or if they see a friend of theirs post something vulnerable, they feel more motivated to engage with them personally one-on-one rather than use social media to publicly check in on them.
2. Analytical and reflective mindset
How many times have you gone onto Reddit, YouTube, or any other site and just skimmed past comments that are just different versions of “yes, and,” “no, but,” or “yes, but”? Or the ever insightful, formerly popular comment “First!” in a thread? These silent browsers lean against adding to such noise unless they have some valid and thoughtful contribution (if they bother to comment period).
These non-posters are likely wired on reflective thinking rather than their initial intuition. Not to say that all those who comment aren’t thoughtful, but many tend to react quickly and comment based on their initial feelings rather than absorbing the information, thinking it over, researching or testing their belief, and then posting it. For "lurkers," it could by their very nature to just do all of that and not post it at all, or share their thoughts and findings privately with a friend. All in all, it’s a preference of substance over speed.
3. High sense of self-awareness
Carried over from the first two listed traits, these silent social media users incorporate their concern over their vulnerability and their reflective mindset into digital self-awareness. They know what triggers responses out of them and what causes them to engage in impulsive behavior. It could be that they have engaged with a troll in the past and felt foolish. Or that they just felt sad after a post or got into an unnecessary argument that impacted them offline. By knowing themselves and seeing what’s being discussed, they choose to weigh their words carefully or just not participate at all. It’s a form of self-preservation through restraint.
4. Prefer to observe rather than perform
Some folks treat social media as information, entertainment, or a mix of both, and commenting can feel like they’re yelling at the TV, clapping alone in a movie theater when the credits roll, or yelling “That’s not true!” to a news anchor that will never hear them. But contrary to that, social media is a place where those yells, claps, and accusations can be seen and get a response. By its design, social media is considered by experts and the media as performative, regardless of whether it is positive or negative. Taking all of the previously mentioned traits into account, one can see why they would prefer to “observe the play” rather than get up on the stage of Facebook or X.
On top of that, these non-commenters could be using social media differently than those who choose to fully engage with it. Using this type of navigation, there may be nothing for them to comment about. Some commenters are even vying for this for their mental health. There are articles about how to better curate your social media feeds and manipulate algorithms to create a better social media experience to avoid unnecessary conflict or mentally tiring debate.
If you go on a blocking spree on all of your accounts and just follow the posters that boost you, it could turn your social media into a nice part of your routine as you mainly engage with others face-to-face or privately. In terms of commenting, if your curated Instagram is just following cute dogs and all you have to offer for a comment is “cute dog,” you might just enjoy the picture and then move on with your day rather than join in the noise. These non-commenters aren’t in the show and they’re fine with it.
5. Less motivated by social validation
The last trait that Brown showcases is that social media users who browse without posting tend to be independent from external validation, at least online. Social media is built to grow through feedback loops such as awarding likes, shares, and reposts of your content along with notifications letting you know that a new person follows you or wants to connect. This can lead many people to connect their activity on social media with their sense of self worth, especially with adolescents who are still figuring out their place in the world and have still-developing brains.
Engaging in social media via likes, shares, comments, and posts rewards our brains by having them release dopamine, which makes us feel good and can easily become addictive. For whatever reason, non-commenters don’t rely on social media as a means to gauge their social capital or self worth. This doesn’t make them better than those who do. While some non-commenters could have healthier ways to boost their self worth or release dopamine into their systems, many get that validation from equally unhealthy sources offline. That said, many non-commenters’ silence could be a display of independence and self confidence.
Whether you frequently comment online or don’t, it’s good to understand why you do or don’t. Analyzing your habits can help you determine whether your online engagement is healthy, or needs to be tweaked. With that information, you can then create a healthy social media experience that works for you.