Scott points out the masochistic tendency of movements to elevate the most extreme and often false examples of their case. Supporting an obviously true story proves nothing, to signal effectively it must be radical. Activists shoot themselves in the foot, catalysing their own opposition, just to be more widely discussed. It is the unbelievable stories and invidious acts which make headlines. Those incendiary publications are what prompt discussion, and this fitness advantage is why the outrage prospers. The narcissism of small differences allows for tribes to form around almost nothing, and once the war begins it is a self-energising cycle.