Sourcing e-reality

Any information found online comes with a level of doubt regarding its credibility. The internet is not only bloated with fake news, but the actual information found is often contradictory and, as mentioned in the previous chapter, capable of firing up endless debates. Depending on the source consulted, things can be good and bad at the same time, criminal and lawful, deviant and/or normal. For example, as noted on the academic blog The Conversation, individuals of various age groups worldwide appear to have been engaging in an obscure practice shared online known as ‘jelqing’, which involves violently rubbing their genitals to increase penis size (Taylor, 2024a). This technique has gained popularity through online sources, although it is not widely recognized by medical professionals due to the potential long-term harm and concrete danger of erectile dysfunction. Despite this, information regarding this practice can be found on numerous medical websites, including the popular (yet reasonably contentious) Healthline (Jewell, 2023).

The Onlife not only highlights the subtle influence of everyday toxic narratives – shaping choices and perceptions of symbols – but also exposes the dangerous misuse of otherwise harmless tools that reinforce these radicalizing narratives (Valentini et al, 2020). Once again, rather than the device in one's hand replicating knowledge, it only increases misunderstanding and a gives a false interpretation of things.

Similarly, while working on this chapter, I happened to be shopping in a major Italian supermarket and was approached by an elderly lady who could not read the symbols on the back of a bag of coffee. Close to my ear, the lady claimed that ‘no matter my beliefs’, I should be wary of the ‘handshaking symbol’ on the back of products.