“Lemmy might not ever influence global culture to the degree that Facebook and Twitter once did. But it proves that ‘people constructively and healthily socializing via the internet’ is entirely possible without being forced to tolerate any more nonsense than one would normally expect when humans get together. ‘Social media: The Business’ on the other hand cannot exist without the garbage.”
You’re not incorrect, but I think the thing that differentiates this era of social media from the “before times” (I was there too) is that it’s significantly easier for non-techies to join. The internet nowadays has significantly more diversity of perspectives than back then. Those differences are exploited and exaggerated by social media companies to generate engagement. It seems to m that the fediverse model allows for diversity and sanity (or at least not algorithmically-encouraged _in_sanity).
Thanks for reading and the comment!
More perspectives isn’t necessarily better.
The internet used to be a place full of educated people, because otherwise how are you going to get on here? The perspectives we’ve added are, for the most part, not valuable.
It’s true that we have added cultural/ethnic diversity, and women, and that’s grand. Pats on the back all round. But couldn’t we have only added the educated and curious folk? Technically minded and adventurous?
Lowering the barrier to entry for the internet was not done out of high-minded aspiration for a free market of ideals, it was done to sell ads to the lowest common denominator, who spends money like an idiot. It’s why every item on Amazon has a “finance” option now.
The internet was better when it was elitist, and I know that’s a bad thing to say. But I think everyone who was around in the 90s and early 2000s knows it’s true.
Sorry for the harsh words if it’s your article :D you make good points.