I doubt it, but in any case, I certainly hope not. If anything, I think we need to reverse the trend of consumers gobbling up content directly created by other

I doubt it, but in any case, I certainly hope not. If anything, I think we need to reverse the trend of consumers gobbling up content directly created by other consumers. Getting information from your personal network of social media friends rather than from professional scientists, reporters, and investigators is bound to lead to worse information. Getting entertainment from whoever is most popular on TikTok these days is almost certainly bound to be worse artistically and probably even less entertaining than professional content created by real production studios. Just as watching your friends play basketball in the street is a worse product than watching the NBA. There are always tradeoffs, of course. Content produced by people who don't get paid to produce it is certainly cheaper. And being a middleman who gobbles up data and sells ads is cheaper than being a content producer. Ideological tradeoffs, too, of course. You have censorship on one side and curation and information quality on the other side. Unfortunately, I don't think very many people on either side of this want to acknowledge that there isn't a strict ideology we can just adhere to all the time and say one of those is more important than the other. Resisting censorship is probably more important when you're living under the Khmer Rouge, but when you're living in a time of abundance where the motivations of most information peddlers is solely to sell something to you, curation starts tipping the scales. This is going to be constantly changing and there is no fixed answer.