Heh. This line would be a full-stop for my librarian SO: > It’s referred to in the literature as “serendipity.” But otherwise I'm very grateful for this arti

Heh. This line would be a full-stop for my librarian SO: > It’s referred to in the literature as “serendipity.” But otherwise I'm very grateful for this article. For it reminds me that someone should update (adapt) the Propaganda Model for social media. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model#Filters https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model#Filters That would be far more constructive than the alternative theories floated, eg Eli Pariser (filter bubble), Ben Thompson (aggregation model), and this technopositivistic missive. Has anyone asked Chomsky? I've looked, but no joy. -- Edit: > There is always an algorithm. The default one promotes rage, controversy and misinformation. But we don’t have to stick with the default. Clap louder, and surely Tinkerbell will fly.