Excellent point.
IDW folk circulate shoddy sets of ideas and push them as much as they can in all ephemeral media formats--podcasts, youtube lectures, tweets, chats, memes.
These ideas get taken up in stunted format. IDW-developed terms travel widely without being well defined.
These terms weren't well-defined to begin with, but as tweets get deleted, links become disabled, and video archives disappear, it becomes impossible to trace when & where a term's definition received the most sustained attention, or when relations between terms were made clear.
Many adopt those terms--because the terms speak to their perception and, more importantly, the terms carry a sting in a favoured direction--but when questions are raised, there's not a place (or, not anymore) where adherents and skeptics can check & negotiate their understanding.
It's a slippery way of getting out of accountability.
"I'm just right! This *is* cancel culture/grievance studies/a secular religion/biology denial/compelled speech. If you disagree, you're proving my own point!"
Or, alternatively (though this response has dipped a bit out of favour with the dramatic fall of #JordanPeterson):
"I don't think you really understand this term, not until you've watched the thousand hours of youtube/podcast material where it's explained."
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.