Dec 20, 2021·edited Dec 20, 2021Liked by laughlyn (johan eddebo)
This seems to mesh with some ideas I've had. I suspect large "social media" services like twit may be inherently unstable. I'd already noticed a lot of people dropped or largely stopped interacting with these services as the novelty wore off. I expect that to continue in general.
However, as you noted the "conversation" is typically controlled by particular interests. Over time, some portion realize this or just gets bored and leave - the space becomes even more concentrated. I think this will result in an irreversible contraction to ever-smaller echo chambers.
I also think this may even be the only possible evolution for a net of critical mass.
I do think they're not very long-lived in that sense. Twitter and Facebook are losing the kids, who migrate to other platforms which probably face the same situation in a couple of years.
If you go back to about 2002, at least here in Sweden, we had a good handful of popular domestic social media sites, "internet communities", which were really vibrant and creative spaces, and a "devolution" to a more varied and multi-faceted social media environment might not be a bad thing in terms of supporting people's agency.
Still, the control of the conversation is a deep structural issue, and I'm not sure that diversifying the social media environment will do much.
I'm wondering whether the cycle continues to repeat just using different versions of essentislly the same thing, or whether people disengage largely or entirely. Its quite possible any given person may take two or three trips before disembarking. I doubt numbers are even available, but it would be interesting to see how many people who left twitter went to a competitor, and how many just left.
I do think it is important to educate regarding these manipulations. While the specifics may change depending on the media, the general techniques have and will be adapted.
This seems to mesh with some ideas I've had. I suspect large "social media" services like twit may be inherently unstable. I'd already noticed a lot of people dropped or largely stopped interacting with these services as the novelty wore off. I expect that to continue in general.
However, as you noted the "conversation" is typically controlled by particular interests. Over time, some portion realize this or just gets bored and leave - the space becomes even more concentrated. I think this will result in an irreversible contraction to ever-smaller echo chambers.
I also think this may even be the only possible evolution for a net of critical mass.
I'm curious if you see similar effects?
(Edit-slightly less awful sentence structure)
I do think they're not very long-lived in that sense. Twitter and Facebook are losing the kids, who migrate to other platforms which probably face the same situation in a couple of years.
This is an interesting comment: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2019/04/23/a-fading-twitter-changes-its-user-metrics-once-again/
If you go back to about 2002, at least here in Sweden, we had a good handful of popular domestic social media sites, "internet communities", which were really vibrant and creative spaces, and a "devolution" to a more varied and multi-faceted social media environment might not be a bad thing in terms of supporting people's agency.
Still, the control of the conversation is a deep structural issue, and I'm not sure that diversifying the social media environment will do much.
I'm wondering whether the cycle continues to repeat just using different versions of essentislly the same thing, or whether people disengage largely or entirely. Its quite possible any given person may take two or three trips before disembarking. I doubt numbers are even available, but it would be interesting to see how many people who left twitter went to a competitor, and how many just left.
I do think it is important to educate regarding these manipulations. While the specifics may change depending on the media, the general techniques have and will be adapted.