The Work of Being Mid

Here's one simple trick for driving can't-miss engagement

Goon long enough and it’s all mid

In 2024, social media engagement is not just a metric; it's an art form that doubles as the hardest science of all — the science of making "u mad bro." The tactics to generate buzz and provoke public discourse can range from sophisticated content strategies deployed by vast, Hillary Clinton-sized social media squads of overproduced Millennial "elites" to the simple act of a popular¹ anon shitposter declaring something as "mid,"² a colloquialism for mediocrity. The term, which has gained traction for its dismissive simplicity, has become a powerful tool in the social media arsenal to elicit reactions, drive conversations, and engage audiences — it’s dismissive, but not as dismissive as saying something "sucks"/"blows" or claiming "I’m just posting here."³

It’s All Mid Now

The term "mid" suggests something is average, uninspired, or not exceptional. Its usage, particularly on platforms like X, formerly Twitter, can be seen as a digital gauntlet thrown down to challenge the status quo or provoke debate among enthusiasts and dissenters alike. The beauty of calling something or someone "mid" lies in its brevity and the weight it carries in terms of social commentary. It’s the kind of judgment that maintains just enough distance to ensure that wayward posters, gooning and edging⁴ their way through their timelines without so much as a second or even a first thought, pause for a fast-twitch, dumb-as-hell response, to which one can of course say "u mad bro" or "I’m just posting here." It’s wonderful.

Is she mid? “What is truth?” In other words, who gives a crap? It pulled in 324.8k views, and X now shares revenue with paying subscribers. If it made me $50, I’d call anyone/anything mid. Prime rib? Mid. Ryan Gosling? Mid af; you saw better bus boys at the circa-1988 Red Slobster. Jesus? Look, I’m not saying He’s mid, but I prefer to worship at the altar of saviors who *don’t* get crucified…

In this benighted age of social media echo chambers and the perpetual search for viral content, posts that utilize such terms can become lightning rods for interaction. The tweet in question here, featuring an image of a conventionally attractive woman in a red dress with a caption that takes her ass down a notch, is a prime example of this tactic. The statement does not invite discourse or a balanced argument; it demands a reaction. It's a deliberate Sunstein/Thaler-style nudge against the hornet's nest of public opinion.

This strategy aligns with the broader concept of "shitposting," a deliberate act of throwing out a contentious post to disrupt normal conversation and garner attention. It's a form of digital baiting that capitalizes on the visceral nature of social media discourse. When someone reacts with fervor or offense, the original poster can retreat into the casual defense of just stirring the pot for entertainment's sake — but not before bathing in a vast sea of engagement. If you’re subscribed to X and getting paid for the engagement you can farm, this is a wise move. Doing it several times a day is even smarter; a lot of the people you’ve angered will hang around and continue yelling at you, whereupon you can use their futile rage to drive your numbers higher still.

Take It Personal, Make It Personal

The key to this strategy's success is the personalization of the attack. By suggesting that beloved movie stars, sports heroes, cartoons, innovative technology, or even mundane experiences are "mid," the poster invokes the sense of personal affront needed to keep someone "working the post." It's a challenge to one's taste, judgment, and preferences. It turns the act of scrolling through social media into a participatory event, where the audience is compelled to linger at this digital outhouse in order to defend, refute, or amplify the original statement.

While some may view the usage of "mid" and similar tactics as a decline in the quality of social media discourse,⁵ it undeniably serves as a potent tool for engagement. It leverages the emotional investment of the audience, forges a communal experience out of controversy, and captures attention in an overcrowded digital space. Whether one views this strategy as a clever maneuver or a cynical manipulation of social dynamics, it remains an effective way to spark conversation and maintain relevance in the fast-paced world of social media. If you want those sky-high engagement numbers, do this work.

1. “Popular” is a relative term, of course. Nobody knows who tf any of these people are, nor should they.

2. Such pronunciamentos are always issued ex tweethedra.

3. I like both of those — an acquaintance of mine claims they’re still top of the pops when it comes to firing up people who like to pretend they give a shit — but “mid” has more value because it suggests a certain degree of investment on the part of the poster. You’re rendering a halfway sincere judgment; you’re not just saying stuff for a reaction (or so it seems).

4. A word on my frequent use of “gooning” and “edging,” if I may: The pervasive reach of social media extends beyond mere interaction, often inducing a state akin to “gooning,” wherein users become deeply entranced by titillating digital content, typically while periodically stimulating their nether regions in a desultory manner (this is done to extend the “gooning” period as long as humanly possible). This metaphorical comparison draws a parallel between the physiological engagement experienced during intense physical stimuli and the psychological absorption triggered by digital content, like the post described here and others like it. As users — basically in a “goon state” or trance, high on a never-ending supply of user-created content, most of it puerile at best/illiterate at worst — navigate through streams of provocative posts and polarizing opinions on X, formerly Twitter, they can keep themselves in a trance-like state while engaging with the platform, where rational discourse is overshadowed by their raw, emotive reactions. The design of social media platforms, with their incessant notifications and algorithmically curated feeds, fosters this state of arousal, where the consumption of content becomes a reflexive act rather than a conscious choice. In this state, social media does not just capture attention; it commandeers it, leading to a gooning experience that emphasizes continuous mildly stimulating (but ultimately unsatisfactory/unfulfilling) interaction over mindful consumption. See the article linked at note 5, infra, for further detail about communication — or the lack thereof; everyone is “alone together” here — on social media.

5. How can something decline from its “always already” nadir, I wonder? To learn more, read the article David Inman and I wrote for American Affairs Journal a few months ago about how the new dark age is upon us. Instead of losing precious Greco-Roman manuscripts forever, as in the case of the first dark age, we are deluged in a ceaseless flow of words that mean nothing yet attempt to make us feel everything, all the livelong day.