I like the idea of a regulated public alternative, especially for under 16's. If they get used to using it because it is the only option for them until 16, then they are much less likely to switch.
Communication systems are both natural monopolies and public utilities. It was only the neoliberal mania for privatization that blocked us from seeing this at the outset of social media.
Yellow journalism has been with is since the birth of mass literacy and consequently mass media. The ability of the Nazis to exploit the then relatively new media of radio and film was a big part of their success.
In other words, it is not a new problem. We just forgot history for fantasies of competitive markets creating "marketplaces of ideas."
I very much like the notion that promotion of material should be considered publication by network managers. I'm more skeptical of education, although it probably can't hurt. I know very little about digital media, but know a bit about banking. Banks always promote consumer education as an alternative to regulation of their market conduct. "Financial literacy," and all that. I wonder why?
I particularly liked reference to a "an all-purpose TED-talk charlatan". Curiously Ted talks were designed to make expert insights accessible to non-experts. Instead non-experts have proliferated!
Online gambling is huge (and under-estimated), insidious and profitable for influential businesses.
Social media is saviour, snake oil and shitshow all in one.
Yes, it can be glorious. A lifeline for queer kids in regional towns, or lonely teenagers who’ve never met anyone who shares their weird niche obsession. It can be funny, clever and educational. It can be where someone finds their people. I get that.
But let’s not pretend it's benign. It flatters ego, amplifies cruelty, and rewards whatever gets the most clicks; usually outrage, insecurity, or someone's arse in bike shorts. It shrinks attention spans, empathy, and imagination. It’s capitalism at its most efficient: harvesting self-doubt and spitting it back as ads for skincare, hustle culture, and high-yield crypto scams.
The platforms? Run by men with god complexes and the ethical depth of a pothole. Expecting Musk or Zuckerberg to help fix this is like handing the keys to the casino over to the guy who invented poker machines and saying, "Be good."
You are dead right. This ban is political theatre. A lazy substitute for doing anything meaningful on gambling, digital monopolies, or the fact that our public discourse runs on engagement algorithms that reward bile. The research behind it is threadbare. Haidt and Twenge are selling moral panic dressed as scholarship, and too many people are lapping it up.
If we actually cared, we’d break up the tech giants, tax them properly, build public digital infrastructure and stop relying on platforms owned by sociopaths to deliver emergency alerts. Instead, we’ve got a blunt instrument ban that punishes kids while letting the real rot fester.
Still, somewhere out there, a kid just found James Baldwin via a Tumblr post. And that matters. Even if it’s surrounded by sponsored content for brain supplements and shoes they’ll never afford.
"First, we have allowed our government and society to become dependent on for-profit services operated by rightwing billionaires who use those same services to spread vicious lies. Emergency service warnings and public announcements of all kinds rely on sites like Facebook and X for dissemination."
Many times I've encountered youtube channels complaining about being demonetized for the most spurious of reasons(swearing, possibly interpreted as racist, some jokes). The China Show and China Observer both noted a fast huge drop in the viewing numbers that couldn't be accounted for by natural attrition. It was suggested someone in Google perceived their strong stance against the CCP was not good for business. Seems improbable.
After FB cancelled some monitoring I've encountered link traps with a pop up claiming your computer is infected and\or your FB account will be suspended unless I call the number. The amount of garbage has increased. AI makes that a bigger problem.
In every other area of life information is regulated and subject to scrutiny. Why does social media get a free pass? We don't tolerate teachers promoting nonsense but children access nonsense with a few clicks.
That's true if you don't post, and don't read comments. If you do, it's endless dealing with trolls. Block and mute used to work, but now you can't block.
I like the idea of a regulated public alternative, especially for under 16's. If they get used to using it because it is the only option for them until 16, then they are much less likely to switch.
Communication systems are both natural monopolies and public utilities. It was only the neoliberal mania for privatization that blocked us from seeing this at the outset of social media.
Yellow journalism has been with is since the birth of mass literacy and consequently mass media. The ability of the Nazis to exploit the then relatively new media of radio and film was a big part of their success.
In other words, it is not a new problem. We just forgot history for fantasies of competitive markets creating "marketplaces of ideas."
I very much like the notion that promotion of material should be considered publication by network managers. I'm more skeptical of education, although it probably can't hurt. I know very little about digital media, but know a bit about banking. Banks always promote consumer education as an alternative to regulation of their market conduct. "Financial literacy," and all that. I wonder why?
Well said.
I particularly liked reference to a "an all-purpose TED-talk charlatan". Curiously Ted talks were designed to make expert insights accessible to non-experts. Instead non-experts have proliferated!
Online gambling is huge (and under-estimated), insidious and profitable for influential businesses.
Really appreciate your clear exposition
Social media is saviour, snake oil and shitshow all in one.
Yes, it can be glorious. A lifeline for queer kids in regional towns, or lonely teenagers who’ve never met anyone who shares their weird niche obsession. It can be funny, clever and educational. It can be where someone finds their people. I get that.
But let’s not pretend it's benign. It flatters ego, amplifies cruelty, and rewards whatever gets the most clicks; usually outrage, insecurity, or someone's arse in bike shorts. It shrinks attention spans, empathy, and imagination. It’s capitalism at its most efficient: harvesting self-doubt and spitting it back as ads for skincare, hustle culture, and high-yield crypto scams.
The platforms? Run by men with god complexes and the ethical depth of a pothole. Expecting Musk or Zuckerberg to help fix this is like handing the keys to the casino over to the guy who invented poker machines and saying, "Be good."
You are dead right. This ban is political theatre. A lazy substitute for doing anything meaningful on gambling, digital monopolies, or the fact that our public discourse runs on engagement algorithms that reward bile. The research behind it is threadbare. Haidt and Twenge are selling moral panic dressed as scholarship, and too many people are lapping it up.
If we actually cared, we’d break up the tech giants, tax them properly, build public digital infrastructure and stop relying on platforms owned by sociopaths to deliver emergency alerts. Instead, we’ve got a blunt instrument ban that punishes kids while letting the real rot fester.
Still, somewhere out there, a kid just found James Baldwin via a Tumblr post. And that matters. Even if it’s surrounded by sponsored content for brain supplements and shoes they’ll never afford.
"Social media is saviour, snake oil and shitshow all in one." That's perfect !
"First, we have allowed our government and society to become dependent on for-profit services operated by rightwing billionaires who use those same services to spread vicious lies. Emergency service warnings and public announcements of all kinds rely on sites like Facebook and X for dissemination."
Many times I've encountered youtube channels complaining about being demonetized for the most spurious of reasons(swearing, possibly interpreted as racist, some jokes). The China Show and China Observer both noted a fast huge drop in the viewing numbers that couldn't be accounted for by natural attrition. It was suggested someone in Google perceived their strong stance against the CCP was not good for business. Seems improbable.
After FB cancelled some monitoring I've encountered link traps with a pop up claiming your computer is infected and\or your FB account will be suspended unless I call the number. The amount of garbage has increased. AI makes that a bigger problem.
In every other area of life information is regulated and subject to scrutiny. Why does social media get a free pass? We don't tolerate teachers promoting nonsense but children access nonsense with a few clicks.
Hear hear!
As long as you ONLY look at the tab of posts from people you follow, X doesn’t need to be a cesspool.
Or to be precise: your experience of X doesn’t need to be that of a cesspool.
That's true if you don't post, and don't read comments. If you do, it's endless dealing with trolls. Block and mute used to work, but now you can't block.
Yes, if you post it must be a bit hellish.