Responding to Netizen's Comments

Netizens Remarks: 

In the video of Chris Tan, PRINSIPYO VIDEO KO, INAYOS KO NA he mentioned  why BBM supporters despite knowing FEM history, (on stealing, killing and lying)  still cling to the fact that BBM can't go wrong and he is being worshipped like he is some kind of a saint or a god.  He said the term for this condition is COGNITIVE DISSONANCE.  Can you explain in simpler terms what it means and if you can give example ... the better.

Response:

Cognitive dissonance describes the discomfort experienced when two cognitions are incompatible with each other. Cognitive dissonance theory postulates that an underlying psychological tension is created when an individual’s behavior is inconsistent with his or her thoughts and beliefs.

That feeling of mental discomfort about using plastic bags is an example of cognitive dissonance. This is because your beliefs are clashing with your actions or behavior. You believe that humans need to protect the environment, but you still use plastic bags. The internal conflict that this causes makes you feel bad.

Another common example of cognitive dissonance is the rationalization that takes place when people dieting “cheat.” How many times have you committed to healthy eating when a doughnut, muffin, or another delicious-looking food item threatened to take you off course? Then you started to rationalize, “Eh, it's only one doughnut."

So when presented with the grim picture of the atrocities that happened during the Martial law, a BBM supporter has this as his way to rationalize the situation,  "That was the father ... the fault of the father is not the fault of the son."

And this is precisely the reason why a BBM supporter gets upset when you challenge what they hold most closely. Mental conflict occurs when how they see BBM as a person are contradicted by new information.

BBM supporters seek to preserve their current understanding of BBM by rejecting, explaining away, avoiding new information, or convincing themselves that no internal conflict really exists.

Maunlad Ba Ang Pilipinas ng Panahon ni MARCOS

Prodigal Sons or They Know Something

 

- Anak ni Erap: JAKE EJERCITO

- Anak ni Jonvic: ROBYN REMULLA

- Anak ni General Ver: WANNA VER

- Angkan ni Mrs. Marcos: ARANETA and LEDESMA

- Anak ni Loren: LORENZO LEGARDA LEVISTE

-Anak ni Karla: DANIEL PADILLA

Lahat sila para sa Gobyernong Tapat. May nakita siguro silang mali kaya pinili nilang kalabanin ang choice ng kanilang mga pamilya. Kanino ka papanig? Ilang araw na lang. Pagisipan mo ng mabuti. Piliin ang tama.

Crowds For Leni

 

Male Models For Leni

 

LET’S TALK ABOUT SAYING SORRY | Episode 6 | #DidiSerye

Campaign Placards

 

Hugot Lines

 

Check the Difference

 

Hotties Against Corruption

 

Election Reminder

 

Jessica Soho interviews Sen. Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. on State of...

Responding to Netizen's Comments

Netizen's Comment:  

If trolls want to upset people, are they sick?

Response:

A troll is someone who takes particular pleasure in harassing another person online. "Trolls” seek to provoke, upset and harm others via inflammatory messages and posts. In some circumstances, the intent of the trolling behavior may even be to amuse and entertain. However, in my research, I have explored trolling as a malevolent behavior, where the troll wants to hurt their online victim.

The premise for the trolling may have nothing to do with agreement or disagreement on any issue. Some people just like to upset people. They want to make another person feel miserable. 

I had a troll who went after me even though I was not disagreeing with his opinion. I was trying to converse with him and he either saw it as a disagreement or the simple act of acknowledgment meant he could start calling me names. It was eerie. (And it was a male, but not all trolls are male.)

People who disagree and show disrespect are trolls in my opinion. If you offer one opinion and the person dissents with abuse, name-calling, or humiliation, that is trolling. If it is another scenario like a debate with the two of you end up agreeing to disagree, but no one’s feelings were hurt or intended to be hurt, then trolling has not taken place. 

Some people get very emotional when they disagree, but they catch themselves and apologize. I don’t consider that trolling; that is acting like a fallible human being. No one is perfect.

The question does imply that the word troll is overused, and I would agree as disagreeing is not trolling, and regretting the choice of words is also not trolling. My experience with trolls is such that I can tell this person loves the attention he or she is receiving. The person wants to keep the conversation going in which he or she feels in control of the other person’s reactions. The troll usually wants the last word as well. A good way to end the conversation is to just let them win, and get the troll out of your life as it isn’t worth the effort.

So are trolls sick? In some latest studies, since they are engaging in malevolent trolling their behaviors are bordering on sadistic tendencies and psychopathy.

Psychopathy is characterized by callousness, deceitfulness, and a lack of personal responsibility. Sadism is characterized by the enjoyment of physically and/or psychologically harming other people.

Kalaban Ko Ba Ang BBM Supporters