Univision anchor Jorge Ramos’ recent opinion column, titled “Why I’m Not Quitting Twitter” was written, in part, as an explainer into his continued presence on social media. However, it also provides a fascinating insight as to how he views debate, and gives us a window into his biases.
The column starts out with a basic recognition of the vitriol on social media, and its overall societal benefit. It isn’t long, though, before the op-ed descends into self-congratulation from within the comfortable confines of the left-media bubble:
It’s true that many have recently decided to quit (or flee?) Twitter, Facebook and Instagram because of all the senseless fighting and verbal violence. I respect this decision; this community of anonymous (and not so anonymous) people isn’t right for everybody.
Ultimately, the world doesn’t need to know what you had for breakfast this morning. Nor do we, as news consumers, need to read the opinions of someone we’ve never met (and who doesn’t even post a picture or use a real name) on the Syrian war or the crisis at the United States border with Mexico. That’s just digital torture.
In other words, Twitter isn’t for everybody, and probably isn’t for you, either.
Ramos then proceeds to discuss some of the reasons why he’s on Twitter…
Despite all this, I’m not going to stop using social media. Why? Because then I wouldn’t get to hear the voices of the opposition in Venezuela (@jguaido), Nicaragua (@cefeche) and Cuba (@yoanisanchez), all of which are censored in the official press; or the opinions of Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC), whose ideas are making the Washington establishment so uncomfortable.
This above paragraph serves as the latest installment in Ramos’ continued fawning over U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). Ramos doesn’t just “hear” AOC’s opinions, but often amplifies them. Even now, Ramos says that AOC’s ideas make the D.C. establishment “uncomfortable”, but has never offered anything other than uncritical dissemination of these ideas on any of the platforms where he maintains a presence, including…
That’s in part why, a year ago, I launched “Real America,” an online English-language news program that airs on Facebook Watch.
Ultimately, though, Ramos reminds us that he is not actually interested in an actual discussion of ideas, whether AOC’s or any other:
Blocking people is one of the great small pleasures of online life. I regularly block people who bad-mouth others or turn to personal attacks. I also block bots — faceless trolls with no followers.
I’m on social media because it’s an extraordinary communication tool, providing a unique space for me to test out my ideas and arguments. Why would I refuse to use one of the most important inventions of our time?
To be clear, Ramos goes on social media to test out “ideas and arguments,'' such as gun bans, abortion, euthanasia or the Green New Deal. Actual debate, though, is off the table. Ramos doesn't offer space for debate, only validation of ideas he deems worthy of discussion. Should you deviate from orthodoxy, you get the block, which Ramos describes as “one of the great small online pleasures of online life”.
And so it is that Ramos, using journalism as a shield for outright activism, makes crystal clear that he is uninterested in engaging outside of the bubble in which he finds himself.
