Digg and YouTube Powering Atheism 2.0
Wednesday, January 3rd, 2007 by Mike Rundle
A few months ago, in October 2006, Wired News ran a story titled “The Crusade Against Religion” where the author investigated the re-emergence (or emergence?) of atheism powered by some very brilliant scientists and writers. Many people around the world have been involved with this New Atheism, but the most well-known and recognizable figure is Richard Dawkins who is a professor at Oxford University.
There is no “type” of person who might be an atheist, but if you look at Web 2.0 community sites like Digg and YouTube, you’ll see a growing number of users there who display anti-religion or pro-Atheism sentiments. I would go so far as to argue that without large tech-oriented sites like Digg and YouTube, the Atheism 2.0 movement would not have taken off as quickly as it has.
Earlier today, a story hit the Digg frontpage with the title “Murdered for being an atheist” and as of 3:15pm eastern it has over 1100 diggs and nearly 300 comments, easily eclipsing other stories that were made popular today. The first comment in the thread was made by the person who submitted the story:
“It seems like people who are deeply religious are prone to having hallucinations and delusions. This guy was completely insane and is probably better off in jail.”
That comment currently has +134 diggs, which for people who aren’t familiar with Digg comment threads, is a very large positive reaction to that comment. The second comment alludes to the killer liking God so much, that he should be executed so that he can meet his maker quicker while saving taxpayer dollars, and that comment has +127 diggs.
A few comments further down, Tekrat writes how any belief system can be dangerous if taken word-for-word by a radical, and how in his Christian beliefs he takes a particular view of the Bible as a whole and doesn’t just pick and choose. Tekrat is not excusing this person’s actions, rather he says “…this guy should never see the light of freedom again…he’s a picture of everything that has gone wrong with Christianity”, but his comment was immediately dugg down to an impressive -51 diggs. Tekrat also linked to a Christian Science Monitor article titled “Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history”, which has a very inflammatory and anti-Atheistic title, probably one of the reasons Tekrat’s comment was dugg down.
In the last 2-3 months, seven different stories have made it to the front page of Digg that had to do with Richard Dawkins, with 10-12 more about atheism or atheist-related stories. Would many of these news articles become popular on their own if it hadn’t been for the Digg community’s promotion? I don’t think they would.
Recently Newsweek published an article about how the New Atheists are taking to YouTube with their message, denying the existence of a deity in front of thousands of viewers. A video search on “Dawkins” or “atheism” reveals hundreds of videos about atheism, many with over 100,000 views and thousands of ratings. Without Atheism-related videos on YouTube making it to the Digg frontpage, I don’t think many people would be as familiar with Richard Dawkins and Atheism as they are now.
This article isn’t analyzing if there is a God or not, or if Richard Dawkins’ theories are correct, but that Digg and YouTube are extremely powerful devices to project a message to the masses. If you combine the two, as many people have in regards to Atheism, it becomes a veritable force that can sway public opinion like few other outlets can.
Reader Comments
64 Responses to “Digg and YouTube Powering Atheism 2.0”
I think this is one of those “cool kids are doing it” scenarios where people just follow whatever is “cool” or “fresh”
For some reason I dugg that story without looking/reading the site because it was on the front page thats what usually happens on digg once the story is on the front page people will digg it and all you need is 30+ diggs to be on the front page.
January 3rd, 2007 at 7:50 pm
ah just as the prophecy goes..
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:08 pm
It is becuase Digg want to be different, because that is what they think makes thems special. They will never fit in with society, so they embrace it.
The very fact that you would call it Atheism 2.0 shows how stupid the notion is.
Oh…and Digg does not have an impact on society AT ALL. Less than 0.001% have ever HEARD of the site. And about 1% of that visit it more than once or twice a week.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:09 pm
Of course, Digg and YouTube are bringing atheism to a very specific audience: wealthy and educated first-world residents, who are among those most likely to become atheists. Perhaps the reason that pro-Atheist, pro-Dawkins articles receive so much attention on Digg is that the authors are preaching to the converted, so to speak.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:12 pm
Good writeup since you’re not attempting to start a flame war with this.
The flame war will be held on digg comment boards!
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:14 pm
“The question isn’t whether there is a God or not, or if Richard Dawkins’ theories are correct, but that Digg and YouTube are extremely powerful devices to project a message to the masses. If you combine the two, as many people have in regards to Atheism, it becomes a veritable force that can sway public opinion like few other outlets can.”
Yeah, thank friggin god :)
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:18 pm
I dont know Mike. In order for YouTube and Digg to become a “veritable force” to sway mass public opinion on anything, they first need to become a veritable force with the mass public.
They both still serve a relatively small niche audience, who (arguably) are not likely (particularly in the technogeek world of Digg) to subscribe to the beliefs of any organized religion — especially the evangelistic brand of Christianity.
So I feel you’re just seeing the community for what it is. The only swaying going on in public opinion is likely the swaying over of any fence sitters who were already part of that community to begin with.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:21 pm
Amen.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:22 pm
Perhaps this hostility toward religion is simply a frustrated reaction to the recent push by fundamentalists to intrude into established science. I admit to feeling a god amount of hostility when I heard of the attempt to remove the scientific explanation for the Grand Canyon and replace it with the Noah myth. http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=273668&page=1
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:24 pm
Huge Story! You are right on in your observation. I honestly think the proper response would not be to attack the atheist, or the atheism movement, but to start our own strategic campaign, promoting true christianity, which would be spreading the “true” gospel of Jesus, that is salvation which is a gift to anyone who simply believes, and then living truly as Jesus Christ shows us how to live.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:27 pm
diging without reading? i hate when people do that, if you arent gonna read it, dont digg it, regardless of how much you agree with the description
as for this article, i think its very true in that digg and youtube both make it very easy for ideas to spread quickly and gain imediate popularity, if it wasnt for people digging without reading however, you could use the popularity to determine how many people agree with the article that has been posted
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Religion - Atheism…
I seem to recall a certain TV producer, director, author from some years ago. When the camera zoomed in on his typewriter, there was a small note there; in so many words:
“I wish to be exempt from shit.”
At least, that’s how I think I remember it.
That’s me, that’s how I see the world, including religious hype. And hype is what it is. The blind leading the blind, willing to kill and using a god as an excuse. (Note the lower case g?)
A mother kills her children and claims that’s what her deity asked of her?
Isn’t it sad that a species brilliant enough to explore the outer limits of space has members who still bay at the moon and whatever else?
Makes you proud to be a member of that species, huh?
I wouldn’t go as far as saying that religious beliefs do no good; I reckon that Mother Teresa ranks near the top in that category.
It’s the bigoted, arrogant fools who make me shudder. Believe what you like — just sound your horn where I can’t hear it.
The sheep have their consolation — what they can not or will not understand, can just be attributed to their deity.
The torah, the bible, the koran say so. Written by men and we all know that men lie…for whatever reason known only to them.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:30 pm
So sad that people never learn from history. It is the Nazi holocaust all over again. Different Nazis with a different target but it is still hatred out of ignorance and fear of what they do not understand.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:31 pm
Atheism or just plain Hate?
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:31 pm
2007 is the year we atheists fight back. Come join the fun
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:32 pm
I’ve noticed this as well. As a Christian Theist it’s interesting to see the amount of lambasting done against the notion of God in general. Really what has happened is that these sites have become an opportunity to “preach to the choir” and not actually engage theists intellectually. They make the same error they confuse theists with, namely, straw man arguments.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:34 pm
Boy, this was an utterly pointless, anti-climatic article that managed to get itself on the Digg front page, not because of quality writing or insightful analysis, but because of the fact that it mentioned a somewhat relevant topic (religion) and “digg” in the same paragraph.
This is a perfect example of why Bloggers aren’t real journalists, but wanna-be web-page owners (who can’t run their own apahce server).
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:35 pm
Real Atheist: this article was meant to be an objective look at a trend I noticed happening at Digg and YouTube, not as a subjective opinion piece trying to start a flame war.
Someone other than myself submitted this entry to Digg, it made it to the front page on its own merits, and the site stayed up 100% of the time it was up there, so get off your high horse.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:41 pm
First off, I don’t think that Digg has an agenda here, nor YouTube for that matter. It’s not as if Digg is the one promoting this content, so I guess my question is, what’s your point? That there are atheists on Digg? So what?
Secondly, atheism isn’t exactly a doctrine. There’s no “bible” to follow and no church to organize. While it’s true that there are atheist organizations, they are dwarfed by Christian organizations (and other religious organizations). Look at the Evangelical movement which has millions of member who tithe to it monthly.
My point here is that Christianity has within its doctrine an explicit call to action: to be a good Christian, one is supposed to proselytize Christianity. It is the duty of a Christian to tell others of Christ.
Atheism has no such doctrine. As an atheist myself (I grew up in a Christian family) I’m not out to convince anyone that atheism is correct or to the obverse - that religion is wrong.
What bothers me most about religion is that it contains within it the instructions for intolerance: if someone is not a Christian (or Muslim or whatever), then they are lost, and they are either evil or ignorant. I am neither, and when I see posts on Digg about an atheist being murdered for the simple fact that they are an atheist, I find that unjust. I would find it equally unjust when a Muslim murders a Christian (or a Shiite murders a Shia).
It’s that intolerance that I think most atheists find intolerable. If you choose to believe in one god or another (or a whole host of them), that is your business and I am happy that it brings you joy and purpose. Do not assume that I need or want a similar belief, and don’t condemn me because I choose differently than you.
You write: “Digg and YouTube are extremely powerful devices to project a message to the masses. If you combine the two, as many people have in regards to Atheism, it becomes a veritable force that can sway public opinion like few other outlets can.”
Just because 1000 people express their interest in stories that you do not like, I do not think you are correct that this is a “veritable force that can sway public opinion like few other outlets can.” Take one look at the role of religion in our country, in our politics, and in our society and tell me that Digg is the biggest problem we have.
I’m tired of Christians acting like they are persecuted.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:42 pm
AT LAST. Bring it on. All you religious nuts, please go away.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:42 pm
There seems to be a misunderstanding regarding Digg or YouTube…
Neither one “project” anything, especially to the masses, other than perhaps who reads or uses the sites.
They “reflect” the opinions and attitudes of those who use the sites. And apparently more users are speaking out.
Of course that will upset those who feel they have a monopoly on religion and anything else, including Digg and YouTube.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:44 pm
Sadly, Digg’s comment sections are becoming even more juvenile and useless than the comments and moderation on Slashdot. Since every poster has unlimited ability to “digg” or “undigg” comments, people seem to go through marking every statement according to whether they agree or disagree with it. On Slashdot, moderation is more limited and those who have moderator access have a very limited number of points to award, forcing them to be judicious and use those points for things that are more exceptional (for either good or bad). More and more, I’m avoiding posting on Digg at all, because it’s become nothing but a childish free-for-all where opinions are “shouted down” because they’re not popular, not because a person isn’t being reasonable. It’s sad that the system there is so broken.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:46 pm
@ Ralph
Actually I think it’s more one of those “the people with actual intelligence and a sense of rationality” are following it. The recent rise of the Internet and sites like Digg and YouTube has just provided the medium for which atheists can voice their opinions, and the catalyst to promote others to join in.
The problem in real society is that there is still a prejudice towards atheists, so the Internet and people such as Richard Dawkins are encouraging the people with no belief to “come out of the closest” so to speak and actually voice their opinions and not be afraid of the prejudices that religion imposes.
It has been predicted that religion will be essentially gone in 25 years, which will be a massive milestone in the history of mankind. It will remove most of the wars, violence and hate from the world. It will stop religion from interfering in matters of politics and education. It will open society’s minds a tremendous amount. And ultimately it will greatly benefit society and allow mankind to excel in all matters.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:50 pm
There reason for people complaining about religions and atheism is because they dont understand each others views. Each believe in what the believe for different reason. Some are atheist because they were never exposed to religion or can grasped the concept of God. And some are religious because it helps them through life. It gives life a meaning. But problems arouse when people try to force views upon people. If someone is religous dont criticize what they believe in. If someone is atheist let them believe in what they believe. For this instance dont kill either group of people. Thats what is wrong with our world, that is what causes problems. People need to wake up and notice that people are different. Fanatics are people who cause problems. For this case it was a “religous” fanatic that killed an atheist. What is did something very hard to forgive for. But dont criticize all religions because of that one guy. Dont judge a group of people by one person. It is the same as the world judging all Americans by looking at Bush. We are all in separate groups of people. We all need to be careful with what we say and respect religous and atheist people/
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:51 pm
@JK87
“Oh…and Digg does not have an impact on society AT ALL. Less than 0.001% have ever HEARD of the site. And about 1% of that visit it more than once or twice a week.”
- Less than .001% of what has heard of the site?
- Where are you finding that 1% of .001% is visiting the site more than once or twice a week?
I don’t understand how that substantiates your claim that:
“Digg does not have an impact on society AT ALL.”
You sound like a zealous Christian fundamentalist pulling shit out of their asses.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:53 pm
All Praise and glory be to God the Father Almighty. Blessed is He who comes in the Name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.
Those who deny or hate God have but one of two goals in mind.
1. To mainain their delusion of self determination.
or
2. To wound the One they feel has let them down.
Man is without power to determine the course or “fate” of existance, however through God’s love for us Man does have the power to perform the later. What’s sad is it’s their actual suffering that pains God. Not what they say to others about Him.
Forgive yourselves people…for your cruel actions and your selfish expecations of behaviour of a being more distantly removed from our ability to understand than a toddler from that of the most highminded intellectual on the planet.
…
There are two things to note here…the first is that the article has merit in it’s aim and success in expressing one’s opinion in a manner that creates an atmosphere of discussion and debate, the second is the observable phenomenon that those who have faith feel hated for it(faith in God) while those without faith preach that the practice of faith is the source of hate.
This doesn’t interest me as I believe I know why this is, as one living in the Spirit. But it occurs to me that this should be dreadfully interesting to those who do not…
For a person who believes in and worships a monotheistic god, understanding the source of the hatred is simple. We understand that you server one of two masters. Those without faith, are left serving the only master that is left. And he is not a source of the deep and true Love, but rather that shallower kind bound in ethics and socially evolved order…based in self preservation and appeasement.
A man or woman that truly lives under the commandments of Yeshua(Jesus) is not ALLOWED to hate another human being. To do so is sin(disobedience to the Father).
For myself, I worship Elohim(YHWH with Yeshua with Ruah HaKodesh. That is to say, three seperate personalities in one being…it’s what Christians mean when they say “God”. Though, many do not know this…this is who they are referring too)
Please do not take this as an attempt to convert. I am not. I am mearly putting forth my veiwpoint whether or not it is well taken or ill.
Thank you for your time,
Jason Weiand
January 3rd, 2007 at 11:05 pm
Econtalk.org has an interesting podcast on the economics of religion.
It turns out there is a type of person who happens to be atheist, and that type bears a resemblance to users of Digg and other web 2.0 sites.
Single, somewhat alienated, young male.
So, Dawkins gets play here because there is a concentration of people predisposed to believe his stuff here.
I am part of the demographic and I believe this stuff is being targeted towards us for extremely cynical reasons.
January 3rd, 2007 at 11:12 pm
Neuro: I’m not a zealous Christian fundamentalist, but I actually do not believe that Digg has any impact on society at all. And I’m a voracious Digg user!
I believe that Digg reflects changes in society, rather than bringing them on - as do most media outlets at a particular time. And personally I feel like sections of the Digg community are off tilting at windmills in the pro/anti-religion debate.
January 3rd, 2007 at 11:17 pm
Jason Weiand, you’re clearly part of the problem that we Atheists face on topics such as this.
That is that when sensible debate is offered, you’ll revert to quoting some long dead HUMAN authors superstition.
FYI: Most of us Atheist’s don’t hate religion/religious, we’ve simply worked out that it’s nonsense and that those that follow religion have been blindly indoctrinated.
I prefer to use the brain I’ve inherited to think for myself instead of blindly following some out dated superstitious silliness.
That said, all the best with your fantasy!
Regards,
Timelord
January 3rd, 2007 at 11:24 pm
Unfortunately the web 2.0 atheism evangelists are also contrarian quasi-libertarians in my experience.
Climate change denialists, social darwinists, often quite racist towards followers of certain religions (i.e. Arabs).
They’re often just as extreme as the religious they displace.
To paraphrase Bill Hicks
I’d call myself an atheist if I didn’t become one of them.
January 3rd, 2007 at 11:28 pm
I noticed many comments saying that the two sites aren’t mainstream. While Digg may not be the mainstream yet, Youtube is mainstream and getting more popular. Also many people said that Atheism 2.0 and Dawkins are preaching to those who are already converted. First off, I only think that maybe 10-20 percent had ever given religion a real thought, but thats not important. What is important is that now all the new atheists and people who are freshly converted are coming together as a force instead of being non cummunicative. Even if I’m wrong and all they’re doing is ramming atheism around atheist’s throats, the fact that they’re doing it in public will force religious people to either question their beliefs. Hopefully not too many will digress and become complete bible beaters.
January 3rd, 2007 at 11:35 pm
READ THE BIBLE! Learn something:
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/
January 3rd, 2007 at 11:49 pm
Ah I love the commentary here.
As a web 2.0 programmer and a Taoist actively writing about religion and spiritual topics I have been watching this. The simple fact:
Utube and Digg are having an impact. Its permitting people who traditionally kept quiet, for fear of being attacked by others, to speak up. Commentary upon this blog is showing the hostility.
Life is change and change is happening. Perhaps its time for those who quote the past, to take the time to look around and find out what their own thoughts are instead of parroting others and reacting with intolerance.
Also I agree with the statement said earlier: I believe that Digg reflects changes in society,
But it does also help change society by showing what is popular, we are a mass media culture so mass media outlets affect culture.
Peace
January 3rd, 2007 at 11:59 pm
Oh my God! The Evil Atheists are conspiring! Quick, somebody grab a cross and push them back into the closet! We must not let them have a public voice, no matter that they make up a bigger chunnk of society than many demographics!
January 4th, 2007 at 12:07 am
“Unfortunately the web 2.0 atheism evangelists are also contrarian quasi-libertarians in my experience.
Climate change denialists, social darwinists, often quite racist towards followers of certain religions (i.e. Arabs).
They’re often just as extreme as the religious they displace.”
Please provide evidence to back up your claim.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:12 am
I’m amazed that people believe that atheism is being propelled as a result of Youtube and Digg! This is about as sound science as looking at ants and then deciding that if a person grows another 6 legs, they will shrink in size.
Get a life.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:12 am
in response to the first comment:
I don’t really think this is a case of fallowing a trend. And if it is, i could say the SAME thing for Christians. I Know kids that go to youth group and are pummeled by Christianity, even though they only really go to hang out with their friends, who push their beliefs on them as well.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:24 am
Athiests are indeed using the public channels of communication to make their point.
I think the questioning of religous power, validity and influence started on 9/11 when fanatical religious murderers commited terrorism in God’s name, and our president evoked god in our response to them.
That’s why I always flush religion @ http://flushaholybook.com
January 4th, 2007 at 12:26 am
Intelligent discussion with a relious theist….that’s a good one. Oxymoron I might ad. I’ve tried this conversation all the religous people do is spout dogma at you. Their argument falls apart when you bring up those pesky things like reason, logic, and fact. Then they fall back on” you you have to open your heart and let in the light”…..which is a fancy way of saying…let the church brain wash you. And the hypocrisy of religous people is plainly evident by the fact that thier actions don’t follow their words….Bible teachs tolerance and forgiveness. these people cheer the death penalty and war and hold up signs that “god hates fags” and gay people shouldn’t get married. But they forgive thier snake oil salesmen of preachers when they get caught in bed with a man abusing drugs, get caught with prostitues, the list goes on. And I could go into a tiriad about the roll religion has played in history. Religous people do not even follow thier own standards but to them that’s okay as long as they pretend. And they write off any shitty thing they do to another person by going to confession, saying it was gods will, or saying the person was a sinner. Out of all the religous people I’ve met in my life only two of them actually follow what is preached in the bible. And one more things……..statistics have proved that the only two growing religous groups in america are aethists and agnostics…they rest of you religous people are just rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic by switching faiths.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:29 am
This is just a reaction to the Christian fundamentalism that has run rampant in our government and tainted our democracy. Athiests are everywhere, they have finally found a voice. It is easy to think they aren’t around because they do not have a pulpit from which to speak.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:33 am
Congratulations, Naadir Jeewa, you’ve demonstrated the strawman fallacy:
1) Misrepresent your opponents or the position they hold (”Atheists == racists”)
2) Demolish that position (”Racists are bad”)
3) Claim victory (”Therefore, I will not call myself an atheist.”)
January 4th, 2007 at 12:48 am
I hope you people realize that these young people on YouTube and Digg don’t represent the majority of atheists. Most of us have a “live and let live” mindset and respect the beliefs of others. Of course we suffer from religious bigotry daily, but there’s not much we can do about that so we take it in stride.
To the young atheists: Religion is an essential aspect of all civilizations. Without religion, our civilization would never have stabilized to the point that we were able to develop the sciences that would eventually prove religion false. So keep that in mind and please try not to be disrespectful to our religious friends (even when their religious hatred for us gets the better of them).
January 4th, 2007 at 12:51 am
Apparently you don’t visit reddit.com very often — that community has been at the forefront of “Atheism 2.0″ and appears to have a more intelligent audience than digg.
http://reddit.com/info/ww11/comments
http://reddit.com/search?q=dawkins&s=new
http://reddit.com/search?q=atheism&s=new
January 4th, 2007 at 12:54 am
Like it or not Atheism itself a religion - a group with obsessive and passionate beliefs. It this case they are anti-god. All religions including Atheism are all just belief systems based on unsubstantiated facts. God cannot be proven or dis-proven. They try to convert people to their belief structure just like other religions. Sure most religions fly in the face of logic, but it’s not like humans have the universe figured out. Humans can get petty arrogant about how smart they think they are when it comes to science. Atheists should prove there is not a god. Logic does not work with religion.
Atheists are confusing politics with religion. Politics are what has caused mass murders and mayhem throughout the ages, not religion directly. Religion has been the tool of corrupt leaders, politicians and governments to manipulate large groups of people. Because religions are mostly hierarchies they can become corrupted just like governments and corporations.
Religion fulfills humans needs to group together. It is a social network with rules of participation. Many that say they are religious are not. Churches are here to stay until some other form of local social network is formed that can fill the needs of a diverse group of people. Atheism therefore cannot be the solution to religion, unless they have Sunday anti-church.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:58 am
Nobody ever heard of Digg?….I doubt that, considering Digg.com is one of the most viewed sites according to Alexa.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:21 am
The author is perhaps unfamiliar with how Digg operates:
“Digg and YouTube are extremely powerful devices to project a message to the masses”
No, that’s how TV works. Rather than projecting a message to the masses, the masses (ie Digg members) actually decide through democratic voting, which articles are of interest, and what messages they want to hear. User-generated content is what drives these sites.
As for the term “Atheism 2.0″ - stop playing with semantics! Atheism has been around longer than Christianity, and if there was a new version of it recently, I imagine it would have begun with the hippie movement.
The “Murdered for being an atheist” article is about Christian extremism more than it’s about atheism. If you are a Christian, you might like to consider why these reports generate so much interest.
Christian extremism should be treated by moderate Christians as a more serious problem than atheism. Extreme Christians, such as Pat Robertson, or the murderer in the previously mentioned article, do not follow Jesus’ example of showing love towards enemies, instead they act on hatred and judgement. Christian extremists (particularly in USA) exercise disproportionate levels of control over things like public censorship, education, and politics. If you are a moderate Christian, please be aware that it is the extreme elements that give your religion a bad name - just as extreme Muslims have given Islam a bad name.
Extreme Christians who believe that murder is justified in God’s name are NOT followers of Christ. Nor are those who preach hatred, or who make false prophecies etc. They damage the Christian religion more than any atheist could. What atheist would prefer to be full of hate and judgement?
Surely Christians would be better off trying to attract atheists by living Christ-like lives, rather than characterising atheism as a threat to be combatted (while ignoring or tolerating hypocrisy within the church)?
Finally I would like to point out that the conclusion drawn by the author here - that YouTube and Digg combined “become a veritable force that can sway public opinion like few other outlets can” - is not justified in the article. Some of the videos have been seen by 100,000 people, but so what? How has this really swayed public opinion? Is it possible that with the advent of social networking sites where users generate content that you are only now seeing clearly the extent of atheism’s popularity? Is it possible that the pressure placed on traditional broadcasting media (ie where the message *is* projected to the masses, with little or no input from the intended audience) by radical and extreme Christian groups has created an illusion of Christianity that does not actually exist in America today?
If you believe the rather sensational headline, that these social networking sites are responsible for powering atheism, perhaps you also believe that people shouldn’t be able to choose what they want to read or watch; maybe you would prefer to control what people see, the choices they make and beliefs by which they live.
Thanks for reading. If you wondered, I’m (happily) neither Christian nor Atheist (nor American!).
January 4th, 2007 at 2:28 am
THE TRUTH HURTS
2007. let’s go people…
January 4th, 2007 at 2:30 am
There is no Santa Claus.
There is no Easter Bunny.
There is no God.
Grow up.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:01 am
It has been predicted that religion will be essentially gone in 25 years, which will be a massive milestone in the history of mankind. It will remove most of the wars, violence and hate from the world.
Any evidence for any of that? It doesn’t seem likely based on current evidence.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:02 am
Wow…seven whole articles on the front page related to Richard Dawkins over a 3 month period! Have you any idea how many stories make it to the front page of Digg every day?
You might want to pick some stats that prove your point next time rather than the opposite.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:12 am
Digg represents the democratization of news and the interests of the people. There are millions of Atheists, it’s just that mainstream media editors choose not to publicize these opinions as much because it can be politically and economically dangerous for large media corporations.
I’m sure Digg has more than its fair share of Atheists. But for the first time, they have a real voice, as journalists turn to listen to the voice of the people when selecting stories to write about (often I’ll see stories on Digg or BoingBoing before a few days before I see the same story in some mainstream newspaper.
More power to Digg and other vertical topic sites that give a voice to the people.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:49 am
The problem with any religion or lack there of is the extremists. Be the muslim, christian, or atheist. The far ends of any belief are more or a less nuts. The moderates are less heard but the majority by a long shot.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:37 am
Im positive more people go to Church world wide than surf digg and youtube. Therefore the church is a much more powerful device to project a message to the masses.
Next point youtubers and digg(ers) are technology people. Far more likley to believe in science and reality than some ancient rubbish.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:14 am
Atheism 2.0 started on 9/11. Richard Dawkins himself pretty much said so.
Good article - nice to see an impartial analysis of digg comment threads and postings.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:21 am
For anyone doubting YouTube’s effect or future effect on public opinion, I advice them to consider its growth rate:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=god%2C+youtube&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all .
If your records are from 2006 Q1 or earlier you should consider some new investments, maybe.
To those those who say without knowing, and know without questioning, I say pray harder than you’ve ever prayed before. Pray until your praying muscles snap. Pray until you break your prayers, and then wake up and realize you’ve been allowing others to fool you.
Whether you read digg or the bible for your information, remember one thing: consider your sources!
January 4th, 2007 at 5:22 am
The reason Dawkins makes it to the front page a lot is because he’s a scientist, and argues well. Digg, like slashdot, is full of reasonably intelligent people who like reading about science and also like to argue.
Besides which, the most common religion amongst hardcore geeks is not “atheism 2.0″ but Neo-Paganism.
Still, never let “the truth” get in the way of a good story, or driving revenue from a lot of page hits, etc. eh?
January 4th, 2007 at 6:17 am
As an active participant in YouTube, I can say there has been a wave of atheistic material flowing through the video veins. Most notably, the “Blaspheme Challenge” that encourages users to speak out about their belief in anything but God. (blasphemychallenge.com)
However, I agree with commenter “Ralph Dagza”: this wave is similar to a high school and doing what’s “in”. Everyone brace yourself for a wave of deep Christianity to follow.
January 4th, 2007 at 7:15 am
I think this looking at the phenom backwards. It isn’t a “movement” of organized masses attempting to promote an agenda, so much as a democratic recognition of an ideal. People digg or bury based on their feelings, and Atheism resonates with a lot of people who have, historically, not had an outlet to express themselves in a religiously-minded-mainstream.
As a recovered Catholic, and Atheist, I know the perils of both organized religion and an absolute denial of anything we don’t understand now. There are universal truths and a wonderful philosophy in the Bible, but they are nested beneath the very straws of men trying to maintain power that have broken so many of our backs. There are wonderful new advances in our scientific understanding of the universe, but now that our science has begun to understand the subjective nature of reality it is foolish to think that all of our observations can be made empirically.
With that in mind, I think what we are seeing is not “Atheism 2.0″ but a democratically recognized need to reject our past superstition and find a new baseline to begin to explore existence as we move from our primitive past. I have confidence in my belief that many of the born-again atheists will find a need for spiritual edification; I sincerely hope they explore spirituality without dogma, such as can be found in Buddhism and Thelema, or they will surely return to their Christian-roots when their souls are too heavy and they need their old crutches.
January 4th, 2007 at 8:26 am
Probably YouTube, Digg, as well as Mr. Dawkins will be exposed to be conspirators of the Vatican or some evangelical sect. I think religion is far more dangerous today and it really moves in mysterious (subversive) ways.
Timid Ignorance is definitely the norm - just look around. No reason, no progress.So called technological innovators as Apple are caught in a stock option scandal - it always boils down to money, greed, petty human traits.
T.S. Eliot is right, the world ends with a whimper!!!
January 4th, 2007 at 8:41 am
“jesus would be ashamed” is a great thing to search over at my blog for a similar conclusion. well said chap!
January 4th, 2007 at 8:44 am
Read “The God Delusion” by Richard Dawkins.
ANY rational thinking sensible being that can for once separate their EMOTIONAL attachment to a subject (i.e. religion) and read arguments in the abstract would quickly see how absolutely embarrassing it is to believe that your ONE, monotheistic religion (how pompous) or your even polytheistic religion is correct.
Many de facto atheists don’t believe that there is NO god, just that it is HIGHLY improbable. The arguments are there laid out in plain English…At some point rationality will trump all superstition and fear…
January 4th, 2007 at 9:20 am
This so doesn’t matter. My faith and belief system will never change. Not that I’m some bible-whipping zealot, but I’m confident in my beliefs, and it is simple common sense that no one *truly* knows all the answers.
Athiests can claim whatever they like, but they don’t know everything (because science hasn’t figured out everything). Neither do Christians know everything (because God planned it that way).
January 4th, 2007 at 10:06 am
well i digged those stories…why? because im a european post-religionist. i life in a post-structural world where i can be what i prefer to be.
modern christianity is mainly a u.s. thing. since DIGG has a international audience you should not be surprised to see some modern statements there.
is also not necessary to put all non-christians into one label.
i would recommend books like “mille plateau” from deleuze if you want to understand the cultural/spiritual avantgarde of europe.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:21 am
–QUOTED FROM ABOVE–
I think this is one of those “cool kids are doing it” scenarios where people just follow whatever is “cool” or “fresh”
–END QUOTE–
LOL.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:22 am
