The hot response culture (why reason and compassion should prevail)

As with reality TV, even mild exposure to social media can leave us, on a subconscious level, feeling that the world is a more course and threatening place than it actually is. We react with fight-and-flight, but without judgement or self-awareness.

The way people organise around social media is helping to produce a public discourse in which meanness replaces open-hearted engagement. It seems that we value instant, emotional over-reaction more than moderate language and carefully considered and proactive responses to problems.

A case in point: earlier this week an otherwise proficient British university lecturer was fired for expressing views - in moderate language, in a one-on-one conversation - that were considered to be "potentially racist". His views, as they were reported in the press, might be considered slightly stereotypical; they were definitely clumsily expressed. But they were found to be only "potentially" racist. Yet he lost his job.

In a slightly more sane era - a few years ago - this teacher would have been invited to a conversation with his oversight. He would have been asked: "What exactly did you say? What did you mean? On what do you base these opinions?" Then and only then would a decision be made on his suitability for his role.

He likely would have been advised that remarks like these, in today's febrile environment, might be misconstrued and he would be best to keep them to himself in future. Let's be clear: his remarks were not adjudged to be racist, but only potentially so.

This is a small but important step into Minority Report territory, where we effectively adjudge someone a law-breaker before any crime has been committed.

Many people seem inclined now to believe that the best reaction is a "hot" one; that calm deliberation is almost always unhelpful. We've created what I'm going to call a "hot response culture" (HRC).

In the UK, we saw this culture dominate our social discourse on Brexit.

At first, social media provided a helpful platform for debate on the pros and cons of Britain's departure from the EU. Over time, as confirmation bias and information loops kicked it, people grew more entrenched in their beliefs and less likely to respond cordially to even respectful dissent.

When at the end of last year Britain officially left the European Union - the shape of the post-divorce relationship is still being negotiated - the ardour of online debate cooled relatively quickly.

Yet the HRC hasn't cooled down. It has simply found new points of focus.

Today, the HRC expresses itself in discussions on gender self-identification and transition. In some quarters, public figures in the arts and elsewhere have been cajoled, disowned and threatened because their views don't sync with the norms proposed by self-appointed cultural arbiters.