Hot takes driving our discourse

You know what a “hot take” is by now, even if you don’t use the term. Born of the digital, 24-hour news cycle, hot takes are the oxygen-rich blood of daily discourse; online blogs and news sites the heart that pumps them into our homes and offices for consumption, quick processing and redistribution into bars, living rooms and backyard picnics.

Oxford defines the hot take as a piece of commentary, typically produced quickly in response to a recent event, whose primary purpose is to attract attention. It can be read in a matter of minutes, and typically tells us enough about a recent event to satisfy our thirst to stay informed – even if we never get to the point of digesting actual data on the topic.

In the last year or so, a billionaire squatter has seized hold of the hot take and claimed it as his own exclusive property. Hot takes now originate in his smart phone in 140-character bundles, to be blasted out without warning at his sole and absolute discretion. He decides the time and the topic, and we oblige. His name need not be announced – you already know.

After he blasts the hot take into our digital consciousness, its progeny comes from journalists and imposters, who blanket the digital landscape with responsive hot takes that are mostly negative, critical and overstated. They call him evil, incompetent and stupid, call for his ouster, and forecast imminent world collapse if Congress does not oblige.

Congress does not oblige, of course. Congress does not impeach based on hot takes.

The public then steps in to complete the trifecta by dotting message boards and comment sections with volumes and volumes of abbreviated hot takes. Some are anonymous, most are vitriolic, and the overall discourse can be nasty. People feel liberated to unleash certain hot takes in online comment sections that they would never make from behind a podium in a crowded gymnasium.

How can we expect any different, when the author of the original hot take fired an insult he would never utter in the halls of Congress?

Where does it end? Are hot takes just a fad? Will they die a slow and quiet death when the king of hot takes is no longer the most powerful man in the world? More importantly, what are they doing to society, and can they be stopped?

The answer on the first point is that the hot take is here to stay. So long as our news comes quick and dirty, 24/7/365, journalists who need to pump out product quickly will continue to employ the hot take. Writing comes faster when it’s empty of data.

What the hot take is doing, mostly, is spreading a systemic pattern of negativity. Such an overwhelming percentage of this content is negative in nature – due to both the personality of the man driving the news and the conflicting ideologies of those who report on him – and our discourse tends to adopt the tenor of our news.

This can change, but change must come at the hands of those who are driving the conversation. It’s hard to talk of rainbows and butterflies when the forecasts point to storm clouds on the horizon.

This story was originally published July 3, 2017 at 5:20 AM with the headline "Hot takes driving our discourse."