A problem I have with companies using “connection and engagement” as their main goal is that none of them have had a good plan after that. Putting up ads to print you money, and then realizing your best plan is to just keep people on longer so you make more money from ads, is sort of what social media companies have resorted to and newer companies like TikTok have made that their explicit goal from the beginning. I wonder what a plan for a userbase that’s acquired for “connection and engagement” would really look like.
In my experience, the best way to engage in controversial discussions is to already have a non-internet relationship with someone - it's harder to other the person who picked up the mail for you when you were sick, or who helped you move into your new place.
Great article, thank you for writing it. The ideas around the flattening of discourse and attacking fake version of someone’s idea reminded a bit of some of the thoughts in this video, about how bad faith arguers on Twitter win by never playing defense: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wmVkJvieaOA
Thanks for pointing me in the direction of this podcast! I just listened to the episode, and I'd have to agree that it was really great at addressing 'Cancel Culture', or whatever that is. I think that maybe another aspect of 'difficult conversations' is that they're usually had between people who already have a deep and meaningful social connection with one another, and one in which they genuinely care about the other. I guess I'm not quite sure if there's a way to replicate this kind of conversation on a place like Twitter, which i guess opens a different question: if we're unable to have difficult conversations on twitter, then should we even be using it at all? Are we content with the site just being a springboard for journalists, strivers, and media personalities, or are we going to (maybe fruitlessly) continue to try and create a public commons on a site like Twitter? I honestly don't know where this all leads to, besides either abandoning the platform entirely to journos & whatnot, or mashing your head into a brickwall that is twitter's algorithm and design in the hopes of somehow 'reforming' it. Would be curious to hear what else people think.
"Cancel Culture" seems like a culture-war weaponized term for common sense.
Isn't it a good idea to eliminate things that are deemed harmful? DDT? Second hand cigarette smoke? Uninsured drivers? Trolling hate speech that makes others stupider and angrier?
A problem I have with companies using “connection and engagement” as their main goal is that none of them have had a good plan after that. Putting up ads to print you money, and then realizing your best plan is to just keep people on longer so you make more money from ads, is sort of what social media companies have resorted to and newer companies like TikTok have made that their explicit goal from the beginning. I wonder what a plan for a userbase that’s acquired for “connection and engagement” would really look like.
In my experience, the best way to engage in controversial discussions is to already have a non-internet relationship with someone - it's harder to other the person who picked up the mail for you when you were sick, or who helped you move into your new place.
Great article, thank you for writing it. The ideas around the flattening of discourse and attacking fake version of someone’s idea reminded a bit of some of the thoughts in this video, about how bad faith arguers on Twitter win by never playing defense: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wmVkJvieaOA
That's a very good video. Wish I had that years ago.
Thanks for posting.
Thanks for pointing me in the direction of this podcast! I just listened to the episode, and I'd have to agree that it was really great at addressing 'Cancel Culture', or whatever that is. I think that maybe another aspect of 'difficult conversations' is that they're usually had between people who already have a deep and meaningful social connection with one another, and one in which they genuinely care about the other. I guess I'm not quite sure if there's a way to replicate this kind of conversation on a place like Twitter, which i guess opens a different question: if we're unable to have difficult conversations on twitter, then should we even be using it at all? Are we content with the site just being a springboard for journalists, strivers, and media personalities, or are we going to (maybe fruitlessly) continue to try and create a public commons on a site like Twitter? I honestly don't know where this all leads to, besides either abandoning the platform entirely to journos & whatnot, or mashing your head into a brickwall that is twitter's algorithm and design in the hopes of somehow 'reforming' it. Would be curious to hear what else people think.
"We need more spaces for digression and uncertainty and searching conversations. For thinking out loud."
You are so right about that. SO RIGHT! I miss those "old days" where there were real discussions going on in the comment-sections of blogs.
Thanks for this post!
"Cancel Culture" seems like a culture-war weaponized term for common sense.
Isn't it a good idea to eliminate things that are deemed harmful? DDT? Second hand cigarette smoke? Uninsured drivers? Trolling hate speech that makes others stupider and angrier?