"Geriatric Social Media"

[Pellice]

https://newsletters.theatlantic.com...00376a82da/welcome-to-geriatric-social-media/

This is apparently the last free posting of The Atlantic's "Galaxy Brain" newsletter. It's somewhat long and meandering, but attempts to analyze the decay of older social media platforms (even Twitter, which I feel I only mastered in the last couple of years!) and the rise of video media (TikTok).

The part that intrigued me was the observation that text itself - the written word - was less successfully employed by younger people as a means of communication than video. The idea that the written word could decay in favor of visual signs really unsettles me, as I am most confident of writing for expressing myself.

I haven't mastered visual communication. I hate most video clips for obtaining news, as they take so much longer, have to introduce the production team, include unnecesary music, etc. Give me three paragraphs I can bomb through. I dislike video instruction, as I find text allow me to go at my own pace. And I loathe watching other people's selfie videos.

I wonder how long I can deny this new reality?

 

[RunningBum]

+1. Some handyman or car repair type things are improved by a video to show you what to do, but don't put someone on video to read information I can better and more quickly understand if I read it myself.

 

[JoeWras]

Youtube is feeling the pressure and now tries to shuffle you to "Shorts."

The internet has gone through a few shocks that caused great shifts. Social media is along for the ride. Social media (BBS) was one of the first great uses right from the start.

The shifts:

- early 80s: BBS, nerds in the basement (D&D via text)
- Late 80s: forums, newsgroups, gopher, ftp
- Mid 90s: Web browsing (perhaps THE greatest shock so far)
- Mid 00s: Text transitions to video, video even when you don't want it
- Early 10s: apps, force you to apps
- 20s: video short form over everything

I'm a visual guy, but I like my visuals static. The late 90s and early 00s were the ultimate for me. During this time there was a very fast switch to get audio and video working (RealAudio anyone?) I knew the party was over when news sites started forcing videos. It has only gotten more intense since then, and I don't see a return.

The biggest issues with TikTok and shorts is there's no analysis or discussion. Whether it is funny fun, or whether it is serious, it comes out in less than 30 seconds, preferably 15. There's a lot of room for abuse in political discourse when you post a 15 second video that is edited down with no context and has a few angry caption words. Of course, that also describes TV ads. And we know how "excellent" those are.

 

[folivier]

Hear Hear! I'm also one who hates videos and would rather read about whatever the subject is. Some of the "self help" videos are so horribly done it's almost impossible to see what the person is doing due to shaky cameras, terrible lighting, out of focus subjects, etc. I usually don't have the time to watch a 5 minute or longer video about something that I can read in a minute or 2. Especially if I can scan the text in a couple seconds to see if it's actually relevant.
I also in most cases don't like their loud music.
Guess you better get off my lawn also....

 

[athena53]

Anyone remember Fahrenheit 451? It was a science fiction novel written in 1953- not a genre I generally enjoy but this really struck me, It was a time in the future when the printed word was outlawed and the job of a "fireman" was to burn books. Everything the regime wanted you to know was streamed on a giant video screen in your home. In the end a disenchanted fireman finds a hidden colony or resistance- everyone is memorizing a book for the day when the printed word is allowed again.

I agree with the earlier posts. I will not watch news videos and I'm not on TikTok. If I click on a headline and it turns out to be a video I'll go looking for a text story on the subject. I don't even like instructional videos for trouble-shooting computer problems. They all seem to be too full of "padding". "Everyone gets frustrated when X happens. It means you can't do Y or Z. We're gonna show you how to fix this. First, sit in front of your computer..."

Exceptions: workout videos and some instructional videos on YouTube, podcasts I listen to while driving or walking, but they're not boiled down to 30-second sound bytes.

 

[Aerides]

When I read the thread title I thought "oh is that what they are calling facebook now?"

 

[Car-Guy]

^^^^^

Funny, my first thought when I saw the title was they were talking about ER.Org...


For me, I don't have/use FB or Twitter or TicTok... However I do like a lot of the UTube videos. Some for fun, some for informational purposes.

 

[jim584672]

Am I the only one who doesn't do "social media"? Never liked the idea.

 

[Time2]

+1. Some handyman or car repair type things are improved by a video to show you what to do,

Exactly where I went while reading the OP. So much help available for repairs on Youtube.

 

[38Chevy454]

Repair or how-to videos are much different than short social media video. I guess I'm geezerhood since I don't do Tik-Tok or Instagram or whatever. Although I am probably more a luddite than geezer.

To me the biggest drawback of short videos is context. You only get the info the video wants to present. Or the fleeting attention span and limited memory retention. Maybe that's the goal.

 

[ER Eddie]

The part that intrigued me was the observation that text itself - the written word - was less successfully employed by younger people as a means of communication than video. The idea that the written word could decay in favor of visual signs really unsettles me, as I am most confident of writing for expressing myself.

I haven't mastered visual communication. I hate most video clips for obtaining news, as they take so much longer, have to introduce the production team, include unnecesary music, etc. Give me three paragraphs I can bomb through. I dislike video instruction, as I find text allow me to go at my own pace. And I loathe watching other people's selfie videos.

I wonder how long I can deny this new reality?

I love the written word. Books are more efficient, go deeper, give me more control over pacing, and allow highlighting, which makes re-reading (reinforcing learning) easier and more beneficial.

Still, I watch a lot of Youtube. Probably too much.

I can identify a few reasons:

1. There is some good long-form content on there, about nearly any subject you can name. I think of it as seminars on demand. Or debates, speeches, history lessons, whatever.

2. The visual and auditory element do add a lot. Words can only do so much to convey reality.

3. It's nice to have someone speak directly to you, or at least seem like it. There is an ersatz personal connection there.

4. It has made me a better speaker. I don't mean as a public speaker behind a podium; I just mean as a normal speaker in conversation. Written language is different than spoken. I've become a better speaker by listening to articulate Youtubers.

5. It's entertaining. Comedy clips, brief bits of political lunacy, etc.

6. It's easier than a book. Reading takes effort. Watching a video doesn't. In a video, the information is handed it to you on a plate, very easily digested. With books, you'll often have to do work -- unpack what the writer is saying, follow an extended train of thought, visualize the scene, etc.. While you could say this extra effort makes reading superior, I would say, well maybe, but there are times I don't feel like spending the extra energy to read, and I plop down instead to watch Youtube, simply because it's less work.

7. I have found perspectives on there that I have never heard in the mainstream media. The dominant narratives simply exclude certain perspectives. But somehow, they pop up on Youtube and get traction. This can be good or bad, I suppose, but I find it refreshing to hear alternative "takes," rather than just the same old story. Unfortunately, Youtube has gotten more censorious with time, so the freedom you saw on the platform even 5 years ago is no more; opinions are being gradually constricted/restricted, like a lot of social media.


I avoid TikTok. I think watching a lot of 30-second videos would rot your brain.

 

[Time2]

Repair or how-to videos are much different than short social media video. I guess I'm geezerhood since I don't do Tik-Tok or Instagram or whatever.

Same here, but lots of Youtube and I look at a few things on Facebook, but my page has very little on it.

To me the biggest drawback of short videos is context. You only get the info the video wants to present.

You mean 'real life' is different than 'social media life'

 

[Pellice]

Youtube is feeling the pressure and now tries to shuffle you to "Shorts."

The internet has gone through a few shocks that caused great shifts. Social media is along for the ride. Social media (BBS) was one of the first great uses right from the start.

The shifts:

- early 80s: BBS, nerds in the basement (D&D via text)
- Late 80s: forums, newsgroups, gopher, ftp
- Mid 90s: Web browsing (perhaps THE greatest shock so far)
- Mid 00s: Text transitions to video, video even when you don't want it
- Early 10s: apps, force you to apps
- 20s: video short form over everything
...

Totally agree about the WWW. More than a shock, it was a revolution, I believe, absolutely equal to the industrial revolution. One that is still working itself out. We were privileged to experience before and after.

I really liked, and still like, BBs. The most informative and community-forming of social media, I think. I am also the dejected owner of a listserv (predating the web) that was once popular, and could still be very useful to its community, except they've mostly abandoned it for text messages. And everyone in the community agrees that text messages are less useful than the listsev for our purposes - but they still prefer them.

 

[Pellice]

I cannot even conceive as to how video could be really useful in 80% of settings. I'm trying to imagine how I would have communicated all my detailed instructions and "considerations" and back-and-forth with fellow employees and bosses even with text messages. What about my numbered checklists that people could look at while preparing a report? What about my cut and pastes of relevant portions of regulations and previous submissions (cut and pasted for the convenience of the current contributors, I might add, rather than a brusque "look it up."

Good thing I retired when I did.

 

[Kork13]

When I read the thread title I thought "oh is that what they are calling facebook now?"

I actually had the same thought, though I included Twitter in that classification.

I very much agree with OP & others... I hate video content. In done cases, podcasts can be almost as bad. My wife loves it, and is always sending me videos/short podcasts... Which I mostly ignore. I don't like that video takes longer, it's harder to drop & pick-up throughout the day, and in most cases, it's rarely well-reasoned or logical. Just a waste of my time & brain-space. And when you get into 30sec clips? Woof... Even worse.

But does this mean that all of us on the forums are stuck in the 1980s?? ::shrug::

 

[Qs Laptop]

Youtube is feeling the pressure and now tries to shuffle you to "Shorts."

The internet has gone through a few shocks that caused great shifts. Social media is along for the ride. Social media (BBS) was one of the first great uses right from the start.

The shifts:

- early 80s: BBS, nerds in the basement (D&D via text)
- Late 80s: forums, newsgroups, gopher, ftp
- Mid 90s: Web browsing (perhaps THE greatest shock so far)

I found USENET in the mid-90's. That was a blast. Quite a free-for-all, but still civilized. No graphics unless you painstakingly created something out of ASCII characters. Then trolls started showing up and taking over and some groups formed moderated versions of the regular Usenet group. I would put this in the late 90's and/or turn of the century. These mod groups were not popular. Then online forums popped up. Then online forums were trolled and moderated online forums became commonplace (ER.ORG is an online moderated forum.)

Those Usenet days were my introduction to online communities and it made quite an impression. Truly the forerunner of social media. I have people from Usenet I still keep in touch with via email and texts and I even met one of them last year.

 

[ncbill]

Vertical video should be banned by law.

And get off-a my lawn!

 

[jimbee]

Am I the only one who doesn't do "social media"? Never liked the idea.

 

[ExFlyBoy5]

Youtube is feeling the pressure and now tries to shuffle you to "Shorts."

The internet has gone through a few shocks that caused great shifts. Social media is along for the ride. Social media (BBS) was one of the first great uses right from the start.

The shifts:

- early 80s: BBS, nerds in the basement (D&D via text)
- Late 80s: forums, newsgroups, gopher, ftp
- Mid 90s: Web browsing (perhaps THE greatest shock so far)
- Mid 00s: Text transitions to video, video even when you don't want it
- Early 10s: apps, force you to apps
- 20s: video short form over everything

I'm a visual guy, but I like my visuals static. The late 90s and early 00s were the ultimate for me. During this time there was a very fast switch to get audio and video working (RealAudio anyone?) I knew the party was over when news sites started forcing videos. It has only gotten more intense since then, and I don't see a return.

The biggest issues with TikTok and shorts is there's no analysis or discussion. Whether it is funny fun, or whether it is serious, it comes out in less than 30 seconds, preferably 15. There's a lot of room for abuse in political discourse when you post a 15 second video that is edited down with no context and has a few angry caption words. Of course, that also describes TV ads. And we know how "excellent" those are.

Ugh...I abhor the YT Shorts and yes...they seem to push them pretty hard. I have tried to apply a filter to keep them out of search results, to no avail.

I think the young folks have a need to get "snippets" of information and have zero desire to read long form articles. It's a sad state of affairs as far as I am concerned, but I am powerless to change it.

 

[ExFlyBoy5]

Am I the only one who doesn't do "social media"? Never liked the idea.

You do know that this forum counts as social media, right?

Social media refers to the means of interactions among people in which they create, share, and/or exchange information and ideas in virtual communities and networks.

 

[ExFlyBoy5]

Vertical video should be banned by law.

And get off-a my lawn!

Perhaps more of a rant of the day, but I agree 100%. Here is a video PSA about it.

 

[COcheesehead]

If you would have told me 2-3 years ago that I would be enjoying podcasts and YouTube more than any other media, I would have said you’re crazy, yet here I am.

 

[jim584672]

You do know that this forum counts as social media, right?

Not in my book. Message boards have been around before "social media" exploded. Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram, Pinterest, are social media to me, because people post detailed personal information.

 

[prudent_one]

Before too many more years, there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth as people realize without newspapers, without printed media, they can only know what website owners allow to be on their sites. I see this happening already. Old content gets removed if it looks bad in hindsight, so you can't find it any more. The inherent trust that used to be there with newspapers and TV news is gone, everything on the web has a slant and an agenda.

There's a subreddit for my city that is pretty active. But it's run by very left-leaning moderators and the majority of members are like-minded. So to a casual reader, the entire area is super-liberal, the cops are evil, any long-established restaurant automatically sucks, and tons of local businesses need to be boycotted because owners were spotted in photos with conservative leaders and politicians. In reality, there are plenty of less liberal folks but they don't participate in that subreddit as their comments get downvoted into invisibility. There's no point in engaging.

Sites have become echo chambers. Rational discourse with varying opinions is rare. So people get info from sites they know they will agree with, and that's all they see, read and hear. This makes it look like any differing viewpoints could only come from the fringe elements. This is true for both liberal and conservative oriented sites.

 

[Qs Laptop]

Before too many more years, there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth as people realize without newspapers, without printed media, they can only know what website owners allow to be on their sites. I see this happening already. Old content gets removed if it looks bad in hindsight, so you can't find it any more. The inherent trust that used to be there with newspapers and TV news is gone, everything on the web has a slant and an agenda.

This is mostly true. I think the turning point was when the Reagan administration scrapped the Fairness Doctrine. The Fairness Doctrine required radio and TV stations to provide both sides of an issue. While the Fairness Doctrine only applied to over-the-air radio and TV content regulated by the FCC, it opened the door for a broadcasting entity to only show one side of an issue. Soon, cable TV news was taking "advantage" of this and then websites followed suit.

There's a subreddit for my city that is pretty active. But it's run by very left-leaning moderators and the majority of members are like-minded. So to a casual reader, the entire area is super-liberal, the cops are evil, any long-established restaurant automatically sucks, and tons of local businesses need to be boycotted because owners were spotted in photos with conservative leaders and politicians. In reality, there are plenty of less liberal folks but they don't participate in that subreddit as their comments get downvoted into invisibility. There's no point in engaging.

Sad, but true. Ironically, this subreddit site may be thought of as exercising their free speech rights by NOT having content they object to on their site. They don't want it on there, they have the right to not show it.

This is where Twitter comes in. Or used to come in. The world learned of the Arab Spring because of Twitter. Twitter played a role in alerting the world to Russia's invasion of both Crimea and Ukraine. The revolution in Iran right now is being fueled by Twitter. Many, many breaking news stories happen on Twitter before they get to the usual websites and news providers. People taking video out in the streets cannot be censored or taken down (at least not here in the US, unless it breaks Twitter's rules.) There is a Twitter account I follow in my area called @CrimeWatchMpls and it monitors police scanners, has a legion of followers that act as eyewitnesses and gather news as it happens, and has access to the "shot spotter" reporting that records the audio and location of gunshots in the city. It is incredible the number of guns going off in Minneapolis on a daily basis, especially on the weekends. It's so prevalent now that if someone gets wounded it doesn't make the news. Only if there is a fatality does it make the newspapers.

Sites have become echo chambers. Rational discourse with varying opinions is rare. So people get info from sites they know they will agree with, and that's all they see, read and hear. This makes it look like any differing viewpoints could only come from the fringe elements. This is true for both liberal and conservative oriented sites.

This is SO TRUE for both liberals and conservatives.