Follow

@codewiz I am struggling to explain this, sorry for long, disjointed words: I think we used to have two main groups of content creators:

1) humans, who say things because they're human and saying things is a human activity. Those things sometimes feel important so get shared more.

2) content creators who made things to bring to market for their own goals (usually financial prosperity or noteriety.)

@codewiz

Think, man sitting at home writing journal, versus man tacking daily newspaper he wrote to lamppost.

I think by social media's nature, by the fact we write to post, not write in a journal then flag to post, and many other things, we have people who do #2... but think they're doing #1. But they aren't, and #1 is very important for helping us... think about how we think, and relate to the world around us, etc. It's true writing/wording, not providing input to get the cheese, y'know?

@codewiz From what I've learned, people truly did just used to journal and write and then if something was worth it, rewrite it as a letter or essay. There was a rough hierarchy of publication, even for, y'know, normal folk, not just academics or w/e.

But now it's all just "put out words, get in likes," and I really think something has been lost in losing writing-that-isn't-for-sharing.

@codewiz Like yes, authors - content creators - have always wanted to get their words out there widely. But there used to be a time we would converse and think with each other, without it being implicit or explicit fame-seeking, or risking consequences of mass exposure, etc.

And I think in losing that, we've lost perspective that word-crafting is a human activity done for its own craft and benefit, not just to get a reward.

(Sorry this hits on a lot of things I've written about in bursts, so)

@codewiz

If you have a thought while stepping out of a chair and forget it 2 seconds later, and if you have a thought and post it and get 20,000 likes, they're both thoughts you had and both are equally valid as thoughts. I feel like it's easy to feel like we need to "register" our thoughts as posts for them to count as being part of us but like, no - it's all part of us.

And I think when "registering" a thought was something that cost transcription, a stamp, and a walk to the postbox...

@codewiz ...at the very least, it was easier to remember that the things you think to yourself are as much a part of you as the parts of you you choose to post.

Which isn't to say, don't maintain a cultivated online identity. But don't conflate it with who you are?

Which is a really long way to say, yeah, I do think social media is different than anything that came before, but I also expect it's more of a slippery slope into social media than I believe.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Ten Forward

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!