By "social media" we mean any large computer network that allows people to interact in shared communities. The big ones of course are Facebook, Twitter (X), and Instagram, but we can't forget newer platforms like Discord and Slack.
Dedicated video sites are off-topic here and YouTube has its own separate thread
.
What we should discuss in this OTC topic are news items, business operations, and activities by the networks themselves, not specific things posted by users. Those should go into threads appropriate to the subjects of those posts. For example, if an actor tweets about a film, we'd discuss that in the Media forum topic for the film, not here. If Facebook changes its policies, that could be discussed here.
The politics, motives, competency and wider business activities of the owners and leaders of social media companies (e.g. Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg) are also off-topic — except in situations where they are directly making specific policy for the platform.
Talking about a particular Instagram policy change (or a high-profile ban on a specific user) directly announced by Mark Zuckerberg would be acceptable in this thread, speculating about Zuckerberg's wider motivations wouldn't be.
The thread's also not about "dumb thing [public figure] said on [social media platform]". If there isn't a specific thread related to the subject of the statement (e.g. US Politics), then it's probably gossip and not worth talking about.
created back in 2020 that we never opened. Unfortunately, it's a little stale, so bumping it isn't going to work very well, but I would like to restart it. The reason I'm doing so is that the Computer Thread seems to have become the de facto place for this sort of talk, and it's a big tonal clash with talking about computer tech.
The hot topic of the day is Elon Musk's bid to acquire Twitter. We first discussed it in the Computer Thread, starting roughly here, and I am not going to rehash the entire discussion. Instead, I am going to resume from the last post:
CNBC: Twitter is reportedly taking another look at Musk takeover bid
Twitter's board is reportedly meeting with Elon Musk and may seek to negotiate on his buyout offer. Musk claims to have secured $46 billion in funding to buy the company at a valuation of $43 billion and is preparing to make a tender offer to its shareholders.
While the board has passed a poison pill, it could be facing resistance to that from groups of shareholders and will want to talk things out rather than face a hostile takeover. It's also possible that Twitter's stock could crash if the offer fails to go through.
Another possible topic was originally posted here.
Ars Technica: EU to unveil landmark law to force Big Tech to police illegal content
Following on from the recently passed Digital Markets Act, which requires large tech companies to unbundle first-party software from hardware platforms, the proposed Digital Services Act will require medium and large social media platforms and search engines to police hate speech and disinformation while adding additional protections for children against targeted marketing.
It also bans "dark patterns", which manipulate or trick people into clicking on ads or other content. The article doesn't explicitly say what that means, but I assume it includes things like disguising ads to look like parts of a site's user interface, hiding "close" buttons, and such.
For large companies, the requirements would go into effect immediately. For medium companies, they would have a grace period to implement the changes.
Thierry Breton, the EU’s internal market commissioner, has warned that Big Tech has become “too big to care.”
This phrase, "too big to care", intrigues me. It's an indictment of the idea that these companies have decided that growth and engagement metrics overwhelm any sense of social responsibility.
In my opinion, a law like this would be impossible in the United States, since it would be challenged (likely successfully) on First Amendment grounds.
Edited by Mrph1 on Dec 12th 2023 at 11:24:56 AM
Redmess
Yeah, I think that's the spirit of the suggestion.
I've also heard people say social media should be able to only allow talking to friends, without having a newsfeed showing posts outside of your friend circle (for children, for example), which is apparently not possible.
Optimism is a duty.
Lost in Space
Social media is where a lot of people get their news. If we suggest they should stop paying attention to the world for a month, that seems a little cynical, although I do advocate taking "mental health breaks" when needed.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
A procrastination in of itself
Which is a major part of the problem. Disinformation runs rampant on social media in a way that makes even Cable News blush.
You know that statistic that you’re better informed on the world if you watch no TV News then if you watch Fox News? There will be major segments of the social media ecosystem where that is also true.
Edited by Silasw on May 4th 2024 at 12:42:41 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Like reflections in the glass!
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
OTOH they do not have a monopoly on news distribution. TV stations, websites and such are still a thing and still common. There are even smartphones apps like Ground News that only only fill the role, but also reveals the biases inherent int he articles in a way that makes them better then just random Facebook posts.
If a enforced one month embargo on social media were to happen, then people that want to learn the state of the world will find ways to do so without social media. Who knows it might lead to them ditching SM entirely for their news fix
Yeah, getting news from social media is one of the major problems of social media, because so much of it is false or distorted. A month off social media means getting news from news sites, not ignoring the news.
Redmess
The problem is also that social media makes it so you can't compartmentalize. Want to see what your friends are doing? Well, here's the news you didn't ask for anyway. There's no way to separate that out on social media. If you don't want to follow the news on your social media site, you can't avoid it.
Also, children don't need to be exposed to the news 24/7. And neither do adults, honestly. That's the CNN mentality.
Optimism is a duty.
Yeah. I'm reminded of a 4chan post, to paraphrase: on modern social media everything from talking about your friend's dinner to lusting over femboys to calling for ethnic genocide is all shoved together on one platform with little or no distinction. No wonder it breeds toxicity.
A procrastination in of itself
Bo Burham’s song “Welcome to the internet” shows the intermingled nature of online discourse very well.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
My Head Is On Fire
”Would you like to fight for civil rights or tweet a racial slur?”
Well, we know the option Musk certainly prefers.
My AO3 profile. Let sleeping cats lie and be cute and calming.
Redmess
But what if I just want to chat with friends and see their funny pics and not have to engage with the Great Social Ills OF The World today? Why does my private time on social media always have to be spent under a megaphone blaring the Hot Topic Of The Day?
Optimism is a duty.
Like reflections in the glass!
Because the internet is built on porn, data harvesting, and outrage farms that aim to rage-bait you into apathy I guess?
Figure of Hourai
To quote the same song we're mentioning "Apathy's a tragedy and boredom is a crime". They don't want to bait you into apathy, they just want you angry. Emotional people are going to spend more/be more easily manipulated. Being apathetic to things keeps you out of the way, but it's so much more wasteful.
Avatar Source
Like reflections in the glass!
I only brougth it up less ebcuase that is a desiable outcome and more an inevtiable result (along side broken pedestals, people exposing the mosnter sbeneath the masks and people becoming radicalised into monsters themsleves)
Like burnout is prolly one of the most consistent end states of terminally online folk here.
A procrastination in of itself
The outrage farms what you paralysed with apathy, the websites would prefer you to be angry but they’re willing to compromise with the outrage farms at getting you into a depressed state of permanent doomscrolling.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Lost in Space
Yeah, but I just don't see how we'd gather agreement for a month of abstinence or whatever.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Besides, that's putting the burden of solving the problem on the users, who aren't causing the problem. The real problem is the design of the platforms themselves, and only the platform owners can solve that.
Jack Dorsey Leaves BlueSky Board and Calls X ‘Freedom Technology’
Excerpt:
Freedom to do what, exactly?
Welcome to Estalia, gentlemen.
Figure of Hourai
What open protocol is twitter, exactly?
Avatar Source
So he ditched Bluesky to go back to X?
Remember, these idiots drive, fuck, and vote. Not always in that order.
Lost in Space
X has reportedly (I don't follow this myself so I'm operating on what I've heard) released its "algorithm" to open-source. This is the process that determines how to present content in a user's feed.
I remember when Jack Dorsey was an icon in the social media landscape, but like so many other enormously successful folks in the tech industry, he went weird.
Edited by Fighteer on May 6th 2024 at 9:25:10 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
"Weird" in the sense that he thinks more user-friendly ways to send dick-picks will safe the world somehow, or "weird" as some right wingnut?
Edited by Kayeka on May 6th 2024 at 3:27:50 PM
Also, did he go weird or did people just not notice before?
Because a lot of the time it's less [insert famous person] "getting weird" and more them just becoming more open about what they actually believe.
Edited by DrunkenNordmann on May 6th 2024 at 3:29:03 PM
Welcome to Estalia, gentlemen.
Lost in Space
Among other things, Dorsey was/is very into crypto. The thread isn't supposed to turn ad homimem, so I'll leave it there.
While it is very likely a case of weird people getting successful rather than successful people "turning weird", it's also true that becoming successful can expose one to lots of perverse influences. Better to say that it amplifies any existing weirdness.
Edited by Fighteer on May 6th 2024 at 9:35:13 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
It also makes it substantialy easier to just cut off every one who doesnt agree with you.
Making the amplification even worse.
I suspect that people who suggest a detox from Social Media (akin to dry January) are thinking of the more narrow definition of social media where communications are public to strangers. So Facebook, Tik Tok, Instagram, Reddit, Tumblr, Twitter, Bluesky, You Tube, Twitch, etc…
While many Discord servers are public and open to anyone private ones where you actually know everyone there are going to have a different effect on people.
The same way that for Dry January some people might not go out to the pub or a bar but still have a drink at home with friends/family.
Book/videogame publishers and radio/TV broadcasters are legally liable for the content people receive from their platform and always have been, social media doesn’t have anywhere near the stringent regulations we put on books and such.
Edited by Silasw on May 4th 2024 at 12:12:47 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran