What Does It Mean to “Be Kind” in the Social Media Age?
Damilola Omotoso / Feb 3 / Social Media
"Be kind" is something we are taught from childhood: to be kind to others and to ourselves. This simple mantra, philosophy or way of life has been co-opted in recent years to mean something else altogether. In the age of the Internet and the ever-prevalent social media, this phrase is often used in an attempt to shirk responsibility. The response "be kind" is usually employed when someone is trying to defend their (or someone else's) actions that could otherwise be deemed "problematic".
The Perversion of ‘Being Kind’
Whilst any view or opinion could theoretically be seen as problematic, in the sense that anyone could take issue with what has been said or done, some can cause genuine hurt and outrage. When this happens online, people flock together to express said feelings towards the one who has done wrong. Yet in such instances, rather than apologise or even acknowledge the harm caused (which is what we learn as children and also as adults as members of society), the person receiving the backlash will oftentimes instead tell others to "be kind". In doing so, this person simultaneously weaponises and undermines mental health problems.
This is said because they treat this phrase as a sort of ‘get out of jail free card’ for their behaviour, which minimises the hurt felt by the offended and trivialises the real mental health struggles that some face. Such a tactic is a form of gaslighting, as it invalidates the feelings of the offended or angry, and consequently absolves the doer of all accountability.
The "be kind" defence is commonplace on social media: whether it's in response to accusations of racism, sexism, homophobia or transphobia. People use the term "be kind" so as to stop people from [rightfully] calling them out for their behaviour. We have heard it being used by influencers who are trying to justify their trips abroad in the midst of the pandemic, despite the UK having recently tragically surpassed 100,000 Covid-19 deaths. In an attempt to rationalise her decision to currently be in Dubai, influencer Sheridan Mordew drew more public ire for deeming her work 'essential'. Under current UK restrictions, travelling abroad is only allowed for reasons outlined in the law. As such, travelling for work is permitted, but it makes us question whether influencing of any nature can be done from the UK. It also serves as a reminder that legality does not equal morality. Not only did this cause backlash, because to the vast majority of people being an influencer is not absolutely necessary right now, but she also reminded us to "be kind". Many viewed this as a cop-out for the very valid criticism she has received, as these actions are in fact not kind to the NHS and other healthcare providers who are working tirelessly to save lives and have repeatedly called for people to stay home.
This rhetoric of being kind is used in all forms of media: during Prime Minister Boris Johnson's Downing Street address in which he said that the Government "truly did everything we could" to limit Coronavirus deaths. The claim sparked outrage, as many people, including doctors and scientists, believe that much could have been done to have greatly reduced the death toll. In spite of this, the consensus of print media is that Johnson is 'doing his best' during the pandemic, which reiterates the notion of "be kind" rather than holding people accountable for their actions. Media plays an important role in the world in which we live: it has the power to reinforce ideas that already exist, shape what we think about and how we frame issues. This has a direct effect on political thoughts and attitudes. With this comes the responsibility to [accurately] inform the citizenry, and do so by way of presenting all the facts and asking difficult questions.
Wielding the phrase “be kind” and hence misusing the principle, which is to do so without scrutiny, can potentially fail to hold people to account. One can be kind and be critical; it is not a zero-sum game.
We Live in a Society
Some may argue that we do not have moral obligations to those around us; therefore it is not for us to feel responsible for the way that others respond to our actions. However, this stance contradicts itself, because if we are not duty-bound or governed by underlying principles of right and wrong and thus not to blame for others' offence, then no one is under any compulsion to "be kind" to you. Hence, you cannot have your cake and eat it too: one cannot hold others liable if they cannot do the same in return.
So What Do We Do?
In our current technological age, it is easy for thoughts, ideas and actions to be misinterpreted, misunderstood or seen by those who were not the target audience (read: those who do not share the same views). Therefore, a tweet or video can quickly be shared by thousands of people all over the world, and these people might vehemently disagree with what you have said or done. Subsequently, if you do not want to apologise or even defend yourself (which is your prerogative), simply telling them to "be kind" seems to completely ignore what people have taken issue with. We have to hold ourselves and each other accountable. However, it is important to note that this is not to advocate for people on the Internet - or in real life - to have free rein to verbally attack someone for their actions.