3 ms·

I 'm surprised sociologists would take Zuck's words seriously. I ve watched him in interviews and in his own podcasts and he doesn't sound like having any kind

by jdrc 5y ago

I 'm surprised sociologists would take Zuck's words seriously. I ve watched him in interviews and in his own podcasts and he doesn't sound like having any kind of sophisticated worldview. The 'context collapse' more likely has to do with the fact that, from an algorithmic point of view, all news fit in the same data format, and nobody cared to introduce context. Or they introduced it in a wrong way (like Google+ did with circles). In the end, context reappeared in the form of separate social networks (linkedin, slack, twitter etc) so it s probably all good

redmen 5y ago
I think he enjoys living in his own bubble and justifies to himself that his work is important. It takes a massive ego to convince oneself that they can do no wrong
l33tbro 5y ago
I think you might mean 'content collapse' here instead of 'context collapse'? They're both terribly clunky terms, but the article defines the former as the homogenisation of all content due to it sharing the same screen. 'Context collapse' I understand as the merging of our pre-online identities (who you were in various contexts) into one authoritative identity due to ubiquitous social networks.
webmaven 5y ago
> I'm surprised sociologists would take Zuck's words seriously. I ve watched him in interviews and in his own podcasts and he doesn't sound like having any kind of sophisticated worldview. Of course they take him seriously, just not as an analyst or scholar, but as a sort of random force of nature whose utterances and whims inform the actions of the people most directly shaping the system through which so much social interaction is now mediated. I don't know if any of the FAANGs allow outside sociologists, linguists, and anthropologists to study them as organizations or societies (as opposed to merely giving access to their platform in order to study users), but it would be fascinating to get that kind of glimpse of how things really work and change over time.

by jdrc 5y ago

redmen 5y ago

I think he enjoys living in his own bubble and justifies to himself that his work is important. It takes a massive ego to convince oneself that they can do no wrong

l33tbro 5y ago

I think you might mean 'content collapse' here instead of 'context collapse'? They're both terribly clunky terms, but the article defines the former as the homogenisation of all content due to it sharing the same screen. 'Context collapse' I understand as the merging of our pre-online identities (who you were in various contexts) into one authoritative identity due to ubiquitous social networks.

webmaven 5y ago

> I'm surprised sociologists would take Zuck's words seriously. I ve watched him in interviews and in his own podcasts and he doesn't sound like having any kind of sophisticated worldview. Of course they take him seriously, just not as an analyst or scholar, but as a sort of random force of nature whose utterances and whims inform the actions of the people most directly shaping the system through which so much social interaction is now mediated. I don't know if any of the FAANGs allow outside sociologists, linguists, and anthropologists to study them as organizations or societies (as opposed to merely giving access to their platform in order to study users), but it would be fascinating to get that kind of glimpse of how things really work and change over time.