Dawkins, Memetics and Social Media

Richard Dawkins (respected/hated Evolutionary Biologist and loved/hated Atheist) has touched off yet another Twitterstorm, via that unfortunate habit Evolutionary Biologists (and Vulcans) have of looking at humans from a viewpoint of mass mathematical game theory participants, rather than as - well, humans. Cue yet another Twitterstorm du Jour. (Huffington Post summaries it best):

To prepare you for the inevitable repeat here are the 12 stages of any Richard Dawkins Twitter scandal:

1. The eminent biologist will employ the rigid rationalism of his discipline to a highly emotive issue – the lack of Nobel prizes for Muslims or how some types of rape are worse than others. Dawkins will then share this insight with his one million followers on Twitter.

2. A cluster of Dawkins’ devotees will debate the professor’s contention in a reasoned and scientific fashion.

3. Someone negatively affected by Dawkins’ clinical assertion will spot the tweet and take issue with his post, replying "really?? #twat".

4. A Twitter user with Jesus/crescent moon as their profile picture will call Dawkins a "c*nt", likening the biologist to Josef Mengele and/or Harold Shipman. Soon thereafter Herr Hitler will be invoked.

5. A journalist will spot the reaction, read Dawkins' original tweet and pen a quick article highlighting the "prominent atheist’s latest Twitter storm".

6. A member of the blue tick Twitter elite – a newsreader or "social commenter" – will pick up on the rumpus, tweeting how the professor’s original post was "indefensible" and how these comments are "the worst yet".

7. Twitter users with #reason, #doubt and #MissTheHitch in their profile will distance themselves from Dawkins, telling their 73 followers that The God Delusion author no longer speaks for "atheists/anti-theists”.

8. Dawkins will continue to defend his position, while other media outlets pen similar hit-focused articles on the brouhaha, many highlighting his past Twitter indiscretions. Right-wing media in the US will pick up on the tempest, decrying Dawkins as the emblem of a world "abandoned by God".

9. People personally affected by the issue of Dawkins’ original post will pen angry responses to Independent Voices and the Huffington Post, many concluding with the line: "How can such a clever man can be so stupid?"

10. Dawkins will issue an apology via his website for the "misunderstanding" and though he will concede his "phraseology" was wrong he will maintain his "logic" was sound.

The irony of Dawkins being called "immoral" by religious and various other "strong beliefs" based groups often proposing far worse things is piquant, but there is an even bigger irony here with Mr Dawkins doing this. He actually was the first person to coin the term "meme" and to postulate how they work. So, depending on your point of view on Mr D, he is either a master memeticist or a complete c*nt who has been hoisted on his own memetic petard by the #Offended on Social Media.

Oh yes - there were 12 points to the Huffpo article, and these are the clinchers I think:

11. Attempting to squeeze a few last hits out of the now-subsiding "outrage", a journalist will write a meta-piece attempting to explain the anatomy of a Dawkins Twitter scandal*.

12. Wait 90 days and repeat.

He is clearly a master memetic tactician therefore, Twitterstorms and meta-pieces being the sign of memetic success - but whether continuing to offend large numbers of people in exchange for viral Twitter publicity is a good strategic memetic play is less clear. Wildean theory says it is effective, but in a Social Media Age where everything you say remains online to be held against you, it may not be. After all, one of the first lessons of social game theory is being nice wins - eventually...

*13. Attempting to extract the last ounces of traffic, a blogger writes a snarky piece on the whole affaire...