DagDag

Is Social Media Useful in 2022? On Twitter, Facebook and Elon Musk

03.05.2022, 14:02

Warning! This Article does not contain any useful content for your business but it is my own concerns about Social Media. If you rather other articles on Marketing, SEO or Sales, go to home page and read my last post.

 

When I read reports that Elon Musk is toying with the possibility of purchasing Twitter I was wondering why he'd be interested. It seems like he's thinking in a larger societal context than I do, and maybe there is a strategic purpose of the platform.

Personally, I'm wondering whether social media was an unproven experiment.

Although it sounds a bit snarky, knowing the way humans think is a good reason to believe that the current condition that social media has reached is the way it will remain. It's not the internet as a whole, since it's too big and fragmented, and it does not unite people as SM does. In my mind are Twitter, Facebook, and their like.

According to me, SM only plays out in one in two different ways.

First, there's an Open Platform (not necessarily Open Source Social Media ) scenario. This is what I'm thinking about when I say Twitter. The issue with this situation is that it is invariably flooded with

(a) Individuals who feel religiously, politically or socially passionate about causes. The more passionate they feel, the more actively participate in their cause because their enthusiasm causes them to write more frequently. These communities are more extensive than what they are on the Internet generally (where you can easily skip visiting a website) or in offline settings since these platforms unite individuals from a variety of different locations and are constantly welcoming new members who might otherwise not know about them.

(b) Subversives of the Government with virtually unlimited resources to manipulate subtility of platforms, either continuously, infrequently or in any other manner they wish.

(c) It is the platform, or others who create API interfaces, scrapers, any other kind of interface, whether with or without the platform's approval or assistance the exploitation of users' privacy rights . However, even platforms where their primary method of operation is private (eg, Twitter) are still able to collect all sorts of data through trackers, cookies, etc.

In short, quickly the platform will not be extremely social, but instead an arena of megaphones competing and angry mobs, hucksters, crusades, shills and. To me, this seems natural because those who have the ability to time (passionate people) or financial power (corporations and governments) or self-interest that is devious (the platforms itself) will be the dominant force.

What's the second scenario? Maybe we can introduce some rules to keep out the harmful things, and let users create their own channels or filters to allow them to communicate only with groups and those they wish to engage with. Oh, you're talking about Facebook.

Facebook has a few aspects of its Scenario One model, chiefly that those with the resources could make use of the off-line power for making their internet presence extremely powerful. In terms of the platform's ability to spy on you it's part of what's in the Facebook business model, so it's the norm.

However, this type of sophisticated filtering causes another issue echo chambers.

In a renowned study from 2010, Harvard mapped the Russian blogosphere and compared it with that of the Western blogosphere. The conclusion was to find that within the West blogs, there's an abundance of overlap and interlinks among blogs, and it is possible to consider it to be "one blogosphere". In Russia instead of a single blogosphere, there are many smaller areas that are separated. These communities are interconnected with one another, but they do not connect to blogs that aren't part of the sphere.

Today, the Russian blogosphere of 2010 is not really the social network, however it is fascinating because it demonstrates the ferocious desire of humans to create exclusionary communities of thoughts. This is basically what Facebook is becoming. Your experience will be different from mine as I belong to diverse groups.

These groups establish powerful norms and rules of conduct which are unique to these groups. Check out how many groups on FB have written rules for the group like "no politics allowed". People who are not members are recognized by the program with an icon that everyone can see, marking that individual as a newcomer within the organization. Are they welcome? Perhaps. Maybe to be on guard for the possibility that someone needs to be evicted or disowned or evicted because of a violation of any group rules or been specifically identified by the group as an "outsider" (I'm thinking that the typical Republican political group wouldn 't like to be surrounded by anyone who is a Biden fan, and vice versa).

They share information and opinions, but they also exclude opposing views, and are in essence, groupthink machines. Even if they're not it's just because of human nature. If I'm someone who is a Southern Baptist, I'm going to join a Baptist group and receive an endless stream of thoughts and articles, as well as comments and other musings that back that view. I'm from joining the ranks of a Catholic or a Hindu group. This is not a negative thing I just want to say that I'm not a member of any crochet groups, and I do not feel like that I'm missing out on a valuable perspective.

However, for many online, the Internet is all about shopping as well as sports scores, and SM. What's the point of watching the news? The best content will be broadcast on SM in the end and you'll be able to skip to what you're interested in. It will be interpreted for you, reacted to, meme'd responded to, and debated in real time, from the perspective you certainly share a more appealing alternative to switching to CNN and Fox. Even if you use multiple SM platforms, you're using the same self-reinforcing filter that leads you to the same social networks.

I'm sure I do not have to make a statement here. Or, you can are an open-platform (Twitter) controlled by the person who has the money, time and will to regulate it, or, you gain complete control, which eventually results in isolated virtual groups.

Del artikkel:


Relaterte artikler