I mean, its a news article posted to a news forum. And if we look at the comments the parent comments for the top 7 threads are:

-unrelated anecdote -praose for the idea behind the festival -something removed (probably some random racist shit). Notably the child comments seem to call out the original sentiment. -a request for more info -tangential conversation about what defines a “major incident”

• the classic “OMG wtf”
• a comment likening this to another “needle panic”

I don’t know if your issue is with the content or the reactions but I don’t see how either points to the issues with social media. It’s a bit sensationalist and some of the comments arent exactly thought provokers, but there’s nothing (that I can see) that screams “social media bad”

No! If we wait two more weeks then Iran will have nuclear weapons!

Cries in non-eu, non-degoogled android

top 1.9% of only fans

This is a complete aside, but does anyone feel like putting “top 2%” sounds better than “1.9”?

Like when I hear top 2 percent I think wow this person is somewhere between 1.5 and 2% but 1.9 makes me think 1.90 to 1.99.

Maybe it’s just me.