This was published 2 months ago
Opinion
‘I don’t know’: Why opting out of conversations has become a social media crime
Charlotte Mortlock
Journalist and political advisorBikini model and influencer Tammy Hembrow is amid a social media pile-on for not weighing into the war in the Middle East.
As far as I can see, the Australian influencer best known for attending Kylie Jenner’s 21st birthday party isn’t in trouble for saying the wrong thing; it’s that she hasn’t said anything on the war at all.
Influencer Tammy Hembrow. Credit: Instagram
Hembrow may well be educated on the matter and has simply decided not to post about it to her 17.4 million Instagram followers. She also might not be, and thus doesn’t want to provide an ill-informed hot take. Neither decision used to be a criminal offence, but times are changing, and she’s been subpoenaed by the court of social media.
A while ago at a dinner, I was seated next to a woman with a fascinating job in psychology, and I asked her lots of questions. She answered most of them with insight and expertise, but on one particular question she didn’t know the answer. She comfortably and unapologetically said, “I don’t know”.
This struck me because of how rare it is these days for anyone to admit they don’t know something. We’ve reached a point of content saturation and arrogance that we’ve all become know-it-alls. In her case, I found it incredibly powerful. I held other things she had said in higher regard because I knew she wasn’t running her mouth for the sake of liking her own voice.
In a bygone, smarter era, you’d be better off saying nothing lest you risked spreading misinformation or looking like an uninformed idiot. Not these days. Now if you say you don’t know, you’re shouted at to “educate yourself!”
Worse than being shouted at for not knowing, though, is an entirely peculiar phenomenon where people are exiled for not saying anything, and the “block lists” floating around on social media, which demand users block influencers (predominantly women like Hembrow) who have remained quiet on certain social issues, or have been vocal, but deemed not vocal enough.
Who is playing God in this situation? Who decides the qualifier of what doing ‘enough’ on a social justice cause looks like? Is there a list of boxes to tick or is it more of a vibe?
By the logic of the creators of these lists, we no longer have the right to opt out of a topic of conversation and should be forced to contribute to conversations even if we don’t want to or aren’t adequately across said topic to provide an informed opinion.
Another strange phenomenon occurring is the hierarchy of who is recognised for doing “the most” for a cause by raising awareness – a bizarre way of saying a lot, but not actually achieving anything tangible. Under this order, the people volunteering, donating money, having conversations in real life, and actually shifting the dial are relegated to the bottom of the pile, while those who take four seconds to repost a photo bask in self-righteousness while feeling warm and fuzzy for having done their bit.
Don’t get me wrong, some people do powerful and informative work on social media. But they’re usually not the ones pressuring fitness models to provide insight into shifting geopolitical relations and international conflicts.
Some people will speak loudly on the things they know the most about, and let others take the lead when it’s not their area of expertise.
Just because someone is not vocal on the same things that you’re vocal about, doesn’t mean you’re better than them. It just means you have different interests, skills or appetite for overt expression.
There will be people who wish everyone were more vocal on the Uyghur population, cobalt mines, the war in Sudan, microplastics in our oceans or the plight of koalas. But we can walk and chew gum at the same time; we can care about and advocate for different things simultaneously. By demanding everyone weighs in on the things we deem fit, though, we risk becoming a society that champions being a jack of all causes and a master of none.
Saying you’re not sure on a topic or opting not to weigh in – particularly on social media – does not make you uncompassionate or uncaring about other people’s experiences. It does not make you ignorant. It does not equate to your interest, advocacy or involvement in a cause. Sometimes, the words “I don’t know” is the strongest thing a person can say.
Charlotte Mortlock is the founder of Hilma’s Network and a former Sky News anchor.
The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform your own. Sign up here.