Addiction to scandals

 “Jerry Springer Show” is a television talk show from the USA that is based on controversy, vulgarity, fights, and nudity - and all this is watched by the audience. The show is a bit like a debate in which simple and primitive problems of the participants are discussed, such as infidelity or misunderstandings in relationships. Guests of the "Jerry Springer Show" format often get emotional and get into arguments with each other, which usually end in a fight between the participants who are separated by security.

What did this format look like? Once all the guests had told their stories, there would usually be a "question and answer" portion where viewers had the opportunity to ask questions. In earlier seasons, they were usually serious. However, over the years, they have lost their value, becoming more like insults than constructive questions.

The program was not successful in its first seasons due to its focus on substantive or political issues. However, in the 1990s, the format changed - from then on, the program was a show of aggression and pathology.

Why do people sit in front of the TV and watch the Jerry Springer Show?

Because they are addicted to scandals and lynching. Today's episode will be devoted to this topic because we explain what the problem of the Polish Internet is.

Addiction to scandals and lynching is a phenomenon that affects both viewers who consume this content and the creators themselves, who often use controversy and emotions to attract attention and increase their audience.

To better understand the topic of addiction to scandals and lynching, it is first necessary to define this phenomenon.

Scandal addiction is a type of psychological addiction in which a person becomes emotionally attached to content or events that generate controversy, tension or emotion. The essence of this type of addiction is the constant need to follow such content and experience strong emotional reactions to it.

Scandal addiction can have various manifestations. Viewers who suffer from this addiction often spend a lot of time watching TV shows, and movies, or following social media, which provide them with a regular dose of emotion and controversy.

This is a type of addiction that can be difficult to recognize because it does not manifest with physical symptoms like chemical addiction.

The essence of addiction to scandals lies in the desire for new emotional stimuli and the need to participate in discussions and comments related to such content. People addicted to scandals and dramas often become emotionally involved in the lives of public figures, celebrities, or media events, identifying with them.

How do viewers become addicted to scandals and dramas in the media?

For many viewers, this addiction begins with subtle steps, but over time it can become a dominant element of their lives.

The first step in this process is usually an interest in a certain event or public figure. Viewers are fascinated by the emotions that accompany a given event or controversy, which may lead to intense monitoring of news or thematic programs. Initially, it may just be curiosity or the desire to be "up to date".

Viewers then begin to actively participate in discussions and comments about this content, both on social media and in conversations with others. This stage is crucial because it allows participants to gain a sense of belonging to a community that shares similar interests. Often, such a person can join a group of other people on Discord, or Twitter and comment on the scandal together.

It is often attractive to join certain groups that form around the scandal community. For example, you can join the group of viewers of a given creator taking part in the conflict, and the names of such groups as "Wataha" enhance the sense of belonging to the community.

As time passes, viewers become more and more immersed in the world of drama and controversy. They begin to feel emotionally involved in the fate of characters or events with which they identify. These emotions can be both positive (e.g. joy at the character's success) and negative (e.g. anger at the antagonist).

However, it is these strong emotions that are at the heart of addiction. Viewers begin to experience a deeper level of excitement as they follow the next story or controversy. As addiction deepens, many viewers may lose the ability to disengage from media or break the emotional cycle that is triggered by viewing dramatic content.

This addiction can affect various aspects of life, including interpersonal relationships, work or academic performance, and overall well-being. Therefore, it is a topic that requires attention and reflection, both from viewers and media creators.

Examples of places on the Internet that use this mechanism are media focused on freakfights and news and commentary channels.

However, the Internet did not pioneer the use of such mechanisms. Television also benefited from this. This includes reality shows such as "Big Brother", "Jersey Shore" or "Keeping Up with the Kardashians". Such programs, whether on television or on the Internet, successfully use viewers' emotional involvement to win the competition for their attention.

Many events on the Internet can be an example of addiction to scandals.

Despite the obviously serious subject matter of this scandal, it cannot be denied that the scandal was also surrounded by a show and public lynching.

One of the comments illustrates the viewers' mood after the publication of a video summarizing the scandal posted on the Konopskyy channel.

You treat the movie Hemp like a thriller and you watch it while eating popcorn and you also say that the material is not that strong xd I'm begging you, have some humanity.

For several days, viewers were warned by the creators that this would be a great film that would end the game, and when the crowd did not get any more great Influencers or another shocking event, they wrote in the comments that they were disappointed with this material. Of course, the creators are not without blame, they warm up the audience and the audience, who, after hearing the strong accusations, wanted to get another dose of emotions.

This comment clearly illustrates that in such a phenomenon the judge is the creator and the executioner is the audience, which is susceptible to various cognitive errors.

The consequences of public judgments may be different - from influencing witnesses, through destroying the image of random people, to hiding evidence. Many internet creators did not intend to help anyone in any way, but to join the growing trend of catching immoral influencers. Millions of people attend a show with such a sensitive topic, and as you can guess, many things got out of hand in this situation.

In the Pandora Gate scandal, any suggestion that someone is guilty can destroy lives - putting a label on it is easy, but getting rid of it - is almost impossible.

When it comes to such matters, viewers look for information, for example, they go to Instagram or other platforms to listen to the agenda, what to do, and who to attack.

Amadeusz Ferrari published the initials of a certain artist, accusing him of sexually abusing a girl at one of the parties. Because Ferrari was throwing accusations left and right, creators with similar initials also got into trouble.

It is worth emphasizing here that some influencers make huge capital - both social and financial - from this type of scandal. Amadeusz Ferrari also joined the cause and published several pieces of content regarding Pandora Gate on his Instagram. Interestingly, right after the scandal broke out when the influencer started getting involved in it, he gained about 70,000 new followers. This leads to the following conclusion - people like to follow such creators, even if they do not contribute anything to the matter and are only based on controversy and speculation.

Will anyone be held responsible for this?

Probably not, but here the question arises: do the creators realize that the audience is not only thirsty for blood but also addicted to scandals? This mix creates a tool to destroy people's lives. Instastories or any other form of publication in such a context becomes a weapon that, if used carelessly, may lead to bad consequences.

The next situation is Sylwester Wardęga's allusion that Friz was almost involved in the case. What could be the consequences of such slander? They may affect primarily family relationships or the label that such a person has something on his conscience. This situation, as Friz also claims, exposes him to speculation, and in such sensitive and delicate matters, being a victim of speculation includes, among others: image destruction.

It is also worth asking yourself a question - what if it turns out that one of the accused is innocent?

The services have not issued a verdict, so any form of lynching and trying to administer justice on your own is not the best idea. And it doesn't really take much for a crowd to attack a suspect. This is well illustrated by the famous "you know what to do with him", said rapper Peja during a concert in Zielona Góra. After these words, the fans of the Poznań rapper gathered at the concert and attacked the man who had upset their idol. Peja watched everything from the stage and shouted: "This is how losers end." To further heat up the atmosphere of the aggressors, the rapper assured: "Everything is at my expense." Being an authority in a given field means not only benefits but above all, responsibility for the people who trust you.

Connecting the show with such serious accusations is actually treading on thin ice.

This applies not only to creators but also to the media.

It is impossible not to mention the articles on the Internet that concern the Pandora Gate case. It is not strange that the media wants to pick up on the current scandal. However, what if these media distort reality and provide false information, such as in the article published by sport.pl? The title suggests that Boxdel and Dubiel are themselves the main perpetrators of the scandal, but the truth is completely different.

The title and the illustrative photo do not reflect what this material is about because the material does not say anything about Boxdel calling for people to come to Jaworzno. If someone is not privy to the matter, they may base their judgment on such content.

The line between online and private life may become blurred for creators, especially creators who have been involved in dozens of scandals and dramas in the past.

This is one of the symptoms of addiction to scandals - a person loses count and cannot distinguish the Internet world from reality. An example is Sylwester Wardęga's statement on one of his live shows. He then spoke about alleged plans to record a court hearing in the Pandora Gate case, if one occurs.

On the one hand, there is talk about the anonymity of victims and how sensitive it is for those affected. On the other hand, if there were to be a trial involving the creators, they would think that it would be a good idea to make the criminal case public on social media. It will probably not come to fruition, but it shows that if such an idea was born in their heads, the creators are also face the problem of addiction to scandals. Little is said about how producing films can change the perception of the world and what impact it has on a person's worldview.

​There may be more negative consequences in the mass production of "scandal" films. These include:

loss of credibility and reputation, impact on mental health, short-term profits at the expense of long-term losses, or ethical and moral dilemmas - all this may be associated with creating content about scandals.

Producers have a lot of benefits from scandalous content, such as: attracting attention, increased viewership and financial results, increased popularity and recognition, shaping viewers' opinions and values. This leads to the following conclusion - such content will always be produced, even at the expense of all the previously mentioned consequences.

This addiction to scandals and lynching shows the dark side of our society. In today's world, where anyone can become a content creator and anyone can potentially be judged by a huge audience, we need to consider the ethical and moral aspects of our online activities. Should you participate in public lynchings? Are we ready to consider the consequences of our actions – both as creators and viewers? Are we ready to refuse to participate in this public lynching? These are questions that each of us should ask ourselves.

Finally, addiction to scandals and lynchings is a reminder of the power of the media and the impact they have on our lives and psyche. We need to be more aware of whether what we watch is really for our good and the good of society as a whole.

Sources:

Instagram statistics (online), access: https://socialblade.com/instagram/user/amadeusznolove?fbclid=IwAR3EFu0agTyw0Y6lizg_Z2pkSYepyT9cFtFqip-aumW9F-15rak7RaDx-zA [access date: October 10, 2023].

Twitter – status (online), access: https://twitter.com/graczolxgrl/status/1709676176510157255, [access date: October 10, 2023].

Twitter – status (online), access: https://twitter.com/Fastinfoo/status/1709296352893567170, [access date: October 10, 2023].