3 ms·
He later relativizes that with: > So that means that access to that kind of higher-quality view of the world becomes a class-based situation where people who'v
by Torwald 7y ago
He later relativizes that with:
> So that means that access to that kind of higher-quality view of the world becomes a class-based situation where people who've got the money to pay for or partially pay for human editors and curators are getting higher-quality info, which I think is just a slight kind of magnification or intensification of the way things are now anyway.
I repeat:
> …intensification of the way things are now anyway.
Now, here I disagree with Mr. Stephenson, these things were much more intense in prior times.
What he observes seems to be the development in the U.S. in terms of tonality of political discussions.
If you look at Asian countries as a counterexample, there is no such "intensification" happen because of SN at all. To the contrary, even the house of suckage, FB, is contributing positively, because a lot of people would not go online without FB or other easy ways. Operating keyword here is easy. For many people, who just made the jump into being alphabetised, or being the first in their family to be so, many SN outlets are a somewhat more comprehensible access point to info, then "Google Fu".
- theoh 7y agoHe is referring to increasing economic inequality. This information inequality helps the rich get richer.
- Barrin92 7y ago>If you look at Asian countries as a counterexample, there is no such "intensification" happen because of SN at all. To the contrary, even the house of suckage, FB, is contributing positively, because a lot of people would not go online without FB or other easy ways. That's hardly an argument in favour of social media. The US is a democracy where people used to have civic debates around a shared reality. That social media isn't going to ruin the debate climate in corporate-governmental societies where civilians don't have any input anyway doesn't really calm my nerves. In fact it frightens me. If the future of the internet is a cluster of entertainment bubbles with business and government bending reality to their will, and China is an example of the future, I'm not really keen on duplicating it. It's actually a very prescient observation: There seems to be a strong correlation between societies with high technological development but no democratic tradition, and the demise of traditional channels of media in favour of social media.
- Torwald 7y agoWhich society "with high technological development but no democratic tradition" witnesses a "demise of traditional channels of media in favour of social media?"
- Barrin92 7y agoI don't think I can actually name you a Chinese mainland newspaper that isn't government owned and controlled. So calling it a demise might have actually undersold it, I don't think independent journalism plays a role at all.
- addicted 7y agoThis is a highly questionable idea. If anything, social media is worse in Asian countries, being used for massive scams, for genocides, for vigilante justice (which often targets completely innocent people), massive amounts of fake news, etc.