4 ms·
> But these are communications platforms. While technically true, this is a gross misrepresentation. Calling these sites and apps "communications platforms" ma
by qwery 3y ago
> But these are communications platforms.
While technically true, this is a gross misrepresentation. Calling these sites and apps "communications platforms" makes them sound like they're just a mail service or a telephone. This is akin to referring to a casino as "the town square".
> That's a freedom you and everyone else can take advantage of also.
This "can" is only true in a strict legal sense, of course.
- ryandrake 3y agoThey’re communication platforms in only a very roundabout sense: like a newspaper’s “Letters to the Editor” section, but quicker. You send your message to Facebook, it decides (algorithmically, not through human editors) whether or not to publish it and to whom, and then Facebook sends that message onward.
- z3c0 3y agoI see the "town square" analogy used a lot, but it's ignoring the actual purpose: it's an advertising platform, run by advertisers for advertisers. The presumed function of communication (something it certainly was started for) is purely for keeping the attention of users to sell to advertisers. As a town square, it's more akin to Times Square.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y agoI dislike the town square analogy as well. What town square requires membership and provides anonymity? What town square do people routinely share dissenting opinions? The fact people feel free enough to routinely share dissent on these platforms shows that it's the opposite of a town square. The very act of sharing dissent in the town square used to be provocative in itself. What's provocative about grieving on Twitter? The town square analogy couldn't be further from reality.