3 ms·
If you substitute the word “television” for “YouTube” or “social media”, you can almost exactly replay the arguments of the 1970s.
by __d 1y ago
If you substitute the word “television” for “YouTube” or “social media”, you can almost exactly replay the arguments of the 1970s.
- spicyusername 1y agoExcept in this case the content is basically totally unmoderated and mediated through an algorithm designed to keep the childrens attention permanently, so I would say the circumstances are at least a little different than back then.
- __d 1y agoYes. And yet. It’s like every generation gets fixated on something new which can be perceived as moral decay and societal harm, and then rails against it. Making it even more popular with the younger generation, of course. I’ve seen the same thing play out with rock music, television, computer games, and now social media. There’s likely examples back throughout history. I think you can mount an argument against all of these things. In retrospect though, it doesn’t hold up. I wonder if social media is the same?
- spicyusername 1y agoYouTube isn't social media, though... It's basically just television with a massive amount of really really bad channels.
- rightbyte 1y agoFor every big tech dystopic platform going all wack there is some "the old greeks complained about kids these days" going my way. Social media need to go. It is bad for us. I don't support a ban but at least the ban indicates there is some sort of room for counterculture. I think only a cultural mindset change works and it cam't be top down.
- __d 1y agoI think that the operational incentives for advertising-funded, for-profit social media make them unavoidably bad. Conceptually, a digital means of communicating life’s events between friends needn’t be terrible, but … the impulse to self-promote is human, and ultimately destructive.