admin
Greg Gutfeld took aim at a new Washington Post piece this week, arguing that social media has inflated a return of “fat‑shaming” hysteria into something it’s not. He and his panel on Gutfeld! pushed back against the idea that calling something “phobic” is automatically wise or true — and they weren’t shy about saying “phobic” is BS.
Gutfeld pushes back — and the show named names
The clip responded directly to a Washington Post article that argued early‑2000s body‑shaming norms are creeping back online, but Gutfeld argued that online outrage often looks louder than it actually is. His panel framed much of the conversation as identity grift — activists and influencers turning moralizing into content — and questioned whether blanket labels like “fatphobia” actually help anyone. That’s a convenient take for viewers tired of being lectured by elites, but it’s only half the story.
Algorithms, echo chambers and the illusion of consensus
There’s a real phenomenon behind the snarling comment threads: platforms reward outrage. Algorithms amplify the loud and weird until it feels like the whole country is yelling at you from your phone. Communication researchers call this the “illusion of consensus” — people see a cascade of posts and assume a majority opinion exists when what they’re really witnessing is an engineered crowd. Ordinary folks mute, scroll past, or simply shut up; the result is more spectacle and less honest debate.
Why shaming still hurts, even if it sells clicks
Before anyone smiles and says shaming “works,” remember what the science says: weight‑shaming backfires. Research shows it raises stress, increases unhealthy eating behaviors, and pushes people away from medical care — not toward better habits. That matters for a working mom avoiding the doctor because she’s afraid of a lecture, or a kid bullied online who doubles down on the one thing shame was supposed to fix.
Who benefits from the shame machine?
Whether you call it moral policing or content economics, someone profits from a culture of shaming. Outrage feeds clicks, clicks feed influencers, and influencers feed the outrage — and real lives get chewed up along the way. If social media is the new public square, shouldn’t we expect better manners in the marketplace of ideas, and better outcomes for people whose health and dignity are on the line? Or will we keep letting algorithms and attention‑seeking shape what passes for public opinion?
