@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.)


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)



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!