This is what no one ever understands. Sometimes an intervention is needed by thoughtful, concerned persons in order to ensure a public space is beneficial to all users and truly free for all users. In this context, it's ensuring a kind of equity of social curation occurs rather than a biased curation. While it's fine to have these affinity spaces for things that don't hurt anyone or infringe upon anothers' freedoms, what's developing online is not really an affinity space. It's a toxic waste dump.

Bunch of voyeurs...

Living vicariously rather than wholeheartedly...

They surely do not encourage meaningful dialogue. In fact, they seem to create an anti-dialogue, where meaningful discourse goes to die. We're being conditioned to experience life in "easy-to-like" soundbytes and to become numb to anything that requires more than a simple, evaluative response. Idk about you all but that's scary to me here on my Arganee cafe perch~

I agree, my mentee. There are no simple solutions online or IRL. We must work on alleviating what symptoms we can. Responsible and ethical guidelines should be implemented by people informed off the issues (not old men who think Facebook is the Internet....)

This is an interesting concept not many people may properly consider due to the perceived convenience of these options. Using a reaction gif provided by Twitter's tenor gif feature is so much faster than having to look up the media, edit it, put it through a gif-making site, and caption it. Same for like buttons--they provide the veneer of interaction without providing any actual substance. There's essentially a kind of null-interaction. It's almost less meaningful than if you had not interacted at all.

Additionally, it's of concern that these sights are curating our emotional ranges or, more, standardizing them. It's a kind of large scale conditioning of the masses. And, we're complacent in it for the sake of convenience.

The Internet provides so many opportunities for unique forms of expression to be created and yet most people don't utilize them. Perhaps they don't know about the opportunities? In that case, developing digital literacy should be an ever-increasing priority in an increasingly digitized world. When the pen was first created, not everyone knew it could be responsible for the literature and art it has conceived. That required exploration and practice. The Internet is a similar tool. Exploration and practice need to be given space and priority to be fostered.

Subjective tbh but a valid concern, I suppose. Are we not all creating reality as we experience it, though? (Not to be pedantically philosophical--i.e. a devil's assh*le)

There seem to be real concerns about the misinformation and the misconceptions online spaces perpetuate. Mainly, life is often presented as a problem that can be solved if a certain product is bought or a certain person's advice is followed. That whole model of existence is inherently flawed. At best, this is exploitative and seeks to make a buck off of people's insecurities and anxieties. Not cool.

Fascinating connection. In many ways, social curation seems responsible for the rise of Influencer culture online. More, it seems to be the foundational process upholding the whole precarious enterprise.

Will it collapse if we poke it???

Especially in regards to how it pertains to young people. Developing brains are far more susceptible to being negatively affected by issues that concern subjects of self-worth and self-esteem. Identity is still being formed and so is quite vulnerable to even the slightest jabs. Social curation on a grand scale doesn't really consider emotional well-being of individuals.

Not just "how" but why it is important to understand this process in a digital space. Social curation has always been present but now the audience has been infinitely expanded. There is intersection and dialogue occurring in these spaces on a massive scale. How we communicate and interact with each other is being inherently affected.

Seems innocuous enough...

(I sense a "but" coming though)

It's so interesting to consider this an issue. Are we not always performing our lives? Is the Internet realm not merely an extension of the stage of life?

That said, social curation in a digital context does seem to pose unique problems. Mainly, who is overseeing it? Where is the quality control? There are many dangerous voices that echo in the void. Too many are susceptible to them. Who is protecting the vulnerable? Should king society rule?

Where are the people? All thee world may be a stage and every aspect of life may be performance and self may just be a construct we're hallucinating but that doesn't make our sense of self any less real. How do we value that in a space like the Internet where value is increasing reliant upon profitability and the commodification of self rather than the appreciation or celebration of it? Has the Internet democratized self so much that it ceases to matter?

Emphasis on human

It shouldn't be a game in the first places. People's lives shouldn't be treated like pawns on a chessboard. Though if life is one giant game of chess, let me tell you I don't want to be some mere pawn; I want to be the strongest player on the board: Queen. Wouldn't you?

It always comes down to dough with people on your side. Profit or bust~

We all become part of this false narrative. We are all susceptible to the entrapments being utilized by social media. It's not only affecting how we use the programs but how we view ourselves and our value. That's not a small problem.

This accessibility and inundation is, maybe, part of why so many people feel compelled to perform rather than live their lives. From the moment they wake up to the time they go to bed, people are interacting with some online interface and being exposed to all its entrapments and being fed false image after false image of what "life" should consist of. Some people are using the web for great things, of course, but, unfortunately, the reality is that more eyes usually see the darker aspects of the web.

Social media has taken the place of religion in that it is now one of the easiest ways to control a massive amount of people without the use of force. The amount of unchecked power social media has over its users is concerning on its own. Again, until recently, there have been very few regulations in place to control this power. More, there has been little concerted effort to make developing digital literacy essential to educational programs. I don't need to be a magician to know that's a hella bad mix (and some bad mojo) all around.

This seems to relate to my alchemist's concerns about social media propelling the momentum of one's life rather than it working in tandem to set a pace with the person. More, this information speaks to the ways in which social media is causing us to perform the actions of our lives rather than be present in the moment to appreciate these moments.