Deep trolling
From dKosopedia
The deep trolling theory attempts to explain the rise of Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and counterattacks like Stephen Colbert, combining perspectives from trolling, deep framing and Buddhist moral theory.
Essentially, the theory accepts the Buddhist or implicature (see note) premise that obvious truths are never stated, that often-repeated statements are lies if only because they are repeated more and more often in inappropriate contexts where they are not true, and that anyone who propagates a doctrine is doing so to control others. From this perspective, there is no such thing as an honest ideology, doctrine or belief. Any statement that can be reduced to words at all is simply an attempt to control, like the command verbs used on graphic user interfaces, e.g. "search". All control verbs used in any human institution, including complex or violent ones like "arrest", "legislate", "appeal", could then be viewed as part of a control system, and conventional systems theory would apply to analysis of social institutions.
As with software or factory production systems, the appearance of "bugs" or unfit products signals a problem with the entire reasoning process, and cannot ever be ignored. Drawing attention to those unfit implications of the reasoning process may actually require and involve mocking, ridicule, harassment and other aspects of politics as usual.
Deep trolling in daily practice is literal interpretation and exact definition and forward chaining, always annoying or amusing to less rigorous users - or those who are trying to avoid the actual implications of their own beliefs.
Behaving more or less mechanically, though being strategic about timing and creative in selection of targets, the deep troll accepts all premises of the given ideology without question. S/he carries it forward to its logical conclusions without challenging it. The effect on wise observers, who recognize the conclusions as unacceptable outcomes, may be different from the effect on stupid ones: the wise will laugh, the stupid feel uncomfortable or "not get it". This tension can be exploited for futher effect: A trollherd often guides stupider people to do things that they do not fully understand, e.g. Stephen Colbert, Rush Limbaugh or Howard Stern encouraging others to troll Wikipedia.
Use of the deep trolling method may be sincere or insincere: an attempt to steer others away from propaganda, and towards examination of their beliefs, ideologies, doctrines and assumptions. It may also be an expression of simple human stupidity - the similarity to simple stupidity being the source of the humour. The sincerity or self-awareness of the presentation is absolutely irrelevant under deep trolling assumptions: Stephen Colbert and Ann Coulter have exactly the same effect regardless of the fact that the latter never cracks a smile while she explains her equally bizarre beliefs. Coulter might actually do more to disrupt the belief system by being a sincere incompetent advocate than by mocking doctrine.
This theory may also explain why Comedy Central (The Daily Show, Colbert Report) has become the primary source of news for college students. Under these assumptions, it is entirely legitimate for citizens to focus on absurd assumptions and hilarious events, because these provide the most opportunities for trolling - and are the best levers for achieving change with efficient use of power (see note)
The world trolling anarchization employs a rather more technical definition of deep trolling, interpreting it as the eventual takeover of the DNS by trolls who would actually define the meaning of every concept in every language using a conflict method.
(note: Grice and Quine are generally credited with implicature theory of language, Donella Meadows with the twelve levers theory of power through leverage of systems, and Stephen Colbert with being pretty much the lead US trollherd as of 2006)
