Weird Internet used to be a few places. Now it (more precisely, the ideas) is everywhere, and reported on as if it is perfectly normal, because "journalism." This ends up legitimizing it further, even if it is painted as weird, as some ideas benefit from any sort of exposure ("the man is oppressing us by painting it as bad!").

Terminally online users are the problem. Until we regard their neurosis, addiction, and proclivity for unreality as a real problem, this will only get worse. Pulling on this string will drag several much harder problems along with it, such as equitable access to mental health care.

> Anyone who has been on the internet for awhile quickly realizes that the “all the posters I don’t like are paid shills” argument doesn’t hold up well at all. It’s often a cope - “my side/the good side would obviously be winning if it weren’t for these paid shills”.

> There are way too many true believers who are terminally online and you can find almost anything out there.

There doesn't have to be a single explanation, though. It can be paid shills and obsessives.

Eh. It can happen. I know someone who's paid to moderate [1] a "grassroots" brand subreddit. It's just that "you're not real" is easier to believe than "you genuinely think Donald Trump is the prophesied Jewish messiah." Barring conclusive evidence (which rarely [2]) people gravitate in one direction.

I'd guess it's a mix, with a little straight money, a lot of obsession, and a middling amount of compensated cat herding.

[1] The playbook being basically "discuss reasonable criticism, remove unreasonable criticism" ie "nobody talk too much about that battery fire, but don't make it look suspicious."

[2] "On the Internet, you know everybody who disagrees with you is a dog."