The lexicographers on the Oxford College Press appear to be punking us. In 2015their “phrase” of the yr was “😂.” In 2023, rizz. In 2024, mind rot. And now the publishers of the Oxford English Dictionary have chosen rage bait. As I write this, the spell-check bot has underlined many of those phrases in pink or blue squiggles, urging me to rectify my missteps. However no errors have been made right here.
Rage bait—each the time period and the phenomenon—is a product of the eye financial system. The Oxford announcement defines it as “on-line content material intentionally designed to elicit anger,” which is “usually posted as a way to improve site visitors to or engagement with a selected internet web page or social media account.” Its utilization has elevated threefold over the previous yr, the press notes. Oxford made its resolution after greater than 30,000 voters had their say. In endorsing this selection, Oxford could also be chasing fame, or clicks, or—sure—rage, however it’s also rightfully recognizing that language is malleable and that the newest improvements are on-line.
Language is the freest market that we’ve. Phrases that prevail accomplish that on advantage, irrespective of their origin. Rage bait is evocative and helpful. As a result of the English language had beforehand failed to offer such an environment friendly time period, we ought to be glad that the web has come by.
When Oxford and different conventional authorities champion concepts and phrases drawn from the web, in lots of instances they’re accused of, at finest, mindlessly following traits and, at worst, debasing English audio system’ cultural heritage. Decrying the elevation of rizz two years in the past, Kayla Bartsch at Nationwide Overview wrote“Establishments reminiscent of Oxford—the first steward of the English language for hundreds of years—have a selection: elevate this new garble, or propel English audio system on towards worthier turns of phrase.” She then argued that “Shakespeare and Dickens have been tossed out and changed with TikTokers and on-line trolls.” The identical yr the British publication The Tab lamented“It’s like they see a phrase they’ve by no means heard of talked about as soon as on TikTok and mechanically assume it’s how each single younger individual speaks.” Beneath these complaints is a a lot older debate between descriptivists, who search to chronicle how folks categorical themselves, and prescriptivists, who favor the enforcement of conventional language norms.
This yr, nonetheless, the criticism from the latter camp has been muted. Maybe the “new garble” has gained. Maybe Oxford’s resolution to crown mind rot final yr spilled the final of the ink on the matter. Some have quibbled that the phenomenon of rage bait is simply too dire and insidious for the time period to be elevated this fashion. As Zoe Williams moaned in The Guardian: “Good luck within the dictionary enterprise, Oxford, should you collude to make rage bait all the fashion.” In any other case, the primary grievance has been that rage bait is, the truth is, two phrases. (In making an attempt to preempt such criticism, Oxford has insisted that their phrase of the yr “could be a singular phrase or expression, which our lexicographers consider as a single unit of which means.”)
All phrases fill some semantic hole. Both they succinctly describe a brand new phenomenon or they describe an present one in a extra enjoyable and nuanced method. Rage bait manages each. In a mere two syllables, it captures a timeless attention-getting technique predicated on human weak spot, and it conveys the acceleration of our algorithmic estrangement from a worthier discourse of concepts. It exposes the baseness of some human impulses and the dysfunctional state of latest politics.
With out the idea of rage bait, we couldn’t adequately describe why the president of america is perhaps broadcasting AI-generated movies of him dumping feces on Individuals who protest his insurance policies. Nor would we have the ability to clarify why California Governor Gavin Newsom, a possible candidate for the 2028 presidential election, celebrated the Democrats’ electoral wins in November with a TikTok of him and fellow celebration members slamming Trump and different Republicans in a mock World Wrestling Leisure smackdown. “Now that’s what we name a takedown,” Newsom posted.
Victory in on-line debates lies in cultivating an ironic detachment whereas triggering rivals into earnest, sloppy anger. This feat has grow to be its personal meme: a picture of a lion shrieking at a blithely amused monkey. In 2025, the monkey is profitable.
This isn’t to say that elevating meme lingo all the time is sensible. Dictionary.com topped 67 as its phrase of 2025. Pronounced “six seven,” the quantity has grow to be a meme that Gen Alpha youngsters love repeating whereas making a juggling hand movement. Their inflection mimics the Philadelphia rapper Skrilla, whose music “Doot Doot (6 7)” kick-started the joke after it soundtracked viral TikTok hype movies of the NBA guard LaMelo Ball, who’s 6 foot 7. However the time period 67which lacks a definition, most likely gained’t final; no child makes use of it in a sentence. It’s merely a universally recognized in-joke that youngsters use to bond, which makes it an odd selection for a phrase of the yr.
The issue with hitching new phrases to memes is that memes die. Meme-popularized phrases from the 2010s, reminiscent of on fleek and yeetare cringe now. Lexical survivors should fill a distinct segment, so selfie, canceland ghosting promise to stay round. So long as we stay ruled by algorithms that promote engagement over nuance, rage bait is more likely to final as properly.
