I had never considered this silver lining of social media, especially since I'm not fond of watching videos. Thank you for pointing out some positive aspects.
As an experiment I downloaded Tik Tok. This was just before the Israel-Gaza conflict kicked off. When that appeared it became apparent the app could quickly show me a whole raft of material without me knowing content providers or even searching.
As noted above, this has the potential to lock you into an echo chamber. But it also has positive applications. I definitely didn't expect to feel informed.
If you are used to that kind of content delivery I strongly suspect mainstream news would feel like a pantomime.
I am not a fan of these things but people do use them.
It's really helpful that you point out how to consciously avoid becoming trapped in a bubble. I can't help thinking that many of us substack readers are deluding ourselves about how many real people feel the same way we do.
With any medium, it's important to look at content from a variety of sources across the political or ideological spectrum.
Yes I agree. I think Substack is quite isolating. I follow a lot of people who publish similar content. Their main discovery tool seems to be notes. Which I find opaque.
I do think we are a minority. But there is a large group who dislike what they see but don't necessarily understand anything. For example I think most people have never heard of the WEF, although it is common knowledge in the substacks I read. So that can give a false sense of shared knowledge.
I appreciate the hopeful take. This is surely better in the short run. What gives me pause is that I can’t validate how much influence the nanny state has on the new media giants. It’s surely not none. ‘Where the carcass is, there the vultures will gather’. I think that’s why Jack Dorsey’s all about Nostr.
I agree. But I suspect the antidote is not something resistant to influence as that may be impossible, but overwhelm. Make it impossible to censor.
I don't think things like Tik Tok are very healthy for society. I just think we now know the mainstream is dead and they haven't quite managed to stop the internet yet. So lots of shaky videos of some events actually works quite well.
Pragmatic. Brings to mind this: the reason the convoy system worked in WWII is that in the vastness of the sea 30 ships slip thru the wolfpack as easily as one. And I suspect your impossibility take is right….nostr or Bitcoin only appear to work until they reach some critical mass.
A good analogy. Exploit their main weakness, lack of coverage. It is better than nothing.
I do think social media algorithms are an interim state. It is not impossible to imagine someone who genuinely wants free speech taking these concepts and specifically building platforms that make auto-selection of content work to expose you to ideas or stories rather than advertising. The method itself works, it just tends to be used to generate money or manipulate.
In my view the "they" is not a singular they, but really a hierarchy responding to an elite vision and even a cultural direction of travel. If you choose the right journalists and editors no explicit instructions are needed. Bias can emerge naturally and subtly.
I had never considered this silver lining of social media, especially since I'm not fond of watching videos. Thank you for pointing out some positive aspects.
Nor me. I am a reader and dislike video.
As an experiment I downloaded Tik Tok. This was just before the Israel-Gaza conflict kicked off. When that appeared it became apparent the app could quickly show me a whole raft of material without me knowing content providers or even searching.
As noted above, this has the potential to lock you into an echo chamber. But it also has positive applications. I definitely didn't expect to feel informed.
If you are used to that kind of content delivery I strongly suspect mainstream news would feel like a pantomime.
I am not a fan of these things but people do use them.
It's really helpful that you point out how to consciously avoid becoming trapped in a bubble. I can't help thinking that many of us substack readers are deluding ourselves about how many real people feel the same way we do.
With any medium, it's important to look at content from a variety of sources across the political or ideological spectrum.
Yes I agree. I think Substack is quite isolating. I follow a lot of people who publish similar content. Their main discovery tool seems to be notes. Which I find opaque.
I do think we are a minority. But there is a large group who dislike what they see but don't necessarily understand anything. For example I think most people have never heard of the WEF, although it is common knowledge in the substacks I read. So that can give a false sense of shared knowledge.
I agree with you about Notes, which I only use if I want to share an especially good post. About as useful as Twitter.
I appreciate the hopeful take. This is surely better in the short run. What gives me pause is that I can’t validate how much influence the nanny state has on the new media giants. It’s surely not none. ‘Where the carcass is, there the vultures will gather’. I think that’s why Jack Dorsey’s all about Nostr.
I agree. But I suspect the antidote is not something resistant to influence as that may be impossible, but overwhelm. Make it impossible to censor.
I don't think things like Tik Tok are very healthy for society. I just think we now know the mainstream is dead and they haven't quite managed to stop the internet yet. So lots of shaky videos of some events actually works quite well.
Pragmatic. Brings to mind this: the reason the convoy system worked in WWII is that in the vastness of the sea 30 ships slip thru the wolfpack as easily as one. And I suspect your impossibility take is right….nostr or Bitcoin only appear to work until they reach some critical mass.
A good analogy. Exploit their main weakness, lack of coverage. It is better than nothing.
I do think social media algorithms are an interim state. It is not impossible to imagine someone who genuinely wants free speech taking these concepts and specifically building platforms that make auto-selection of content work to expose you to ideas or stories rather than advertising. The method itself works, it just tends to be used to generate money or manipulate.
I’d love to define the ‘they’ in that first sentence. That and a list of known vulnerabilities can be the beginning of something interesting.
In my view the "they" is not a singular they, but really a hierarchy responding to an elite vision and even a cultural direction of travel. If you choose the right journalists and editors no explicit instructions are needed. Bias can emerge naturally and subtly.