Don’t bite the bait! Why online rage is all the rage right now

In the today's outrage-hungry world of online content, rage bait has become the go-to strategy for grabbing attention.

If it’s triggering, it’s doing numbers. From “hot take” relationship advice to nasty food content, the algorithm seems to reward whatever makes people the most upset. But why does rage bait travel so well online? Why tf do we keep falling for it, and what’s the cost of using anger as a growth strategy?

I’m not talking about controversial tweets (looking at you Azaelia Banks). This is about how rage is being weaponised by creators, brands and platforms to farm clicks, stoke division and hijack our attention.

So real quick - what is "rage bait"?

In short, it's content designed to provoke a strong emotional response, particularly anger or moral outrage, in order to drive engagement. It can be obvious, e.g. “men shouldn’t go to therapy”, or sneakily packaged as personal storytelling, cultural critique, or even health advice. The goal is to get people fired up enough to comment and/or share - and lord have mercy, does it work.

Anger is one of the most clickable emotions. The human brain is hardwired to respond quickly and strongly to perceived threats, especially in group settings. Algorithms love this, because more engagement means more visibility, and more visibility means more freaking ad revenue. The most infuriating part (ironic, I know) is that most of it rarely even reflects the creator’s real opinions. The content is solely designed to be viral, not right.

The internet has flattened every interaction into performance.

Every post is a chance to signal values, stake a position, or join a side. What used to be bar chat (albeit potentially heated) now plays out in front of a global audience. As a result, people are more reactive, more moralistic, and more invested in being seen to say the “right” thing.

There’s a strong incentive to call things out, pile on, or publicly disassociate, not just for justice, but for clout. Outrage also creates a fleeting sense of control. In a world that feels increasingly chaotic, pointing out what's wrong gives us a rush of moral clarity. And when we do it together in the comments or replies, it becomes communal. A bit like joining a booing crowd and throwing digital tomatoes at villains.

This is how harmless-seeming content can become literal battlegrounds. A woman eating a sandwich becomes a lightning rod for diet culture discourse. Or, a man talking about dating turns into a referendum on gender politics. It’s not so much about the content, but what it represents beneath the surface.

We operate in an extremely polarised ecosystem - that's why it thrives so damn well.

The platforms we reside on don’t just allow division, but depend on it. Middle-ground opinions are hard to package and easy to scroll past. But extremes are far juicier and clickable. They spark arguments. They inspire “response videos” and “this take is wild” quote tweets. And crucially, they generate activity.

Over time, audiences self-sort into sides. It becomes a team sport: red flag vs green flag. Toxic vs healthy. Congrats, you’re no longer watching content - you’re choosing an allegiance. The platforms learn your triggers and feed you more of what you engage with. The echo chambers get louder, and the stakes of every opinion feel higher.

Make no mistake - the system's working as designed.

Rage bait, therefore, has become a tool, a weapon even. Weaponised rage is when anger is intentionally provoked to achieve a goal. That might be growing a following, discrediting an opposing view, driving media coverage, or stoking division for political gain. It’s rage, not just as emotion, but as a tactic.

Some creators build entire platforms on it. Some media outlets depend on it. And yes, some brands are starting to use it too. Take a close look and you’ll spot brands deliberately posting controversial content to spark debate. Or using polarising imagery and language in campaigns to “stand out". When brands start stoking outrage on purpose, knowing full well it will lead to backlash, it means your attention is being weaponised.

So my advice? Don’t bite the damn bait!

Look, I KNOW it’s easier said than done. And this might piss y’all off, but it works because you let it. The moment you comment, quote-tweet, or share something just to say how much you hate it, you’ve already played your hand. You’ve boosted it. That doesn’t mean you have to disengage completely, but it does mean being more selective about where you put your energy.

Ask yourself: is this content trying to provoke me? Who benefits if I get upset? Is this a real issue or just a viral moment? And for marketers: just because rage bait works doesn’t mean you should use it. You can also down a Four Loko and fight a police officer - but does that mean you should? (The correct answer is "no".) Yes, it gets clicks. But it also erodes trust, damages brand equity, and encourages shallow, reactive engagement. Long-term relationships are built on trust - not outrage.

The internet doesn’t need you to be angry, it WANTS you to be. But not everything deserves your attention, your rage, or your keyboard. Sometimes, the smartest move is to protect your damn peace and scroll on by.

-Sophie Randell, Writer