Earlier quoted context omitted.
>there is suffering that would be invisible to the world if it weren't for social media. Definitely, but the algorithms for social media do not help the worst cases of the most suffering become more viral than more infrequent cases of lesser suffering. The issue is that all that matters is virality. Sometimes suffering is viral when it should be, but other times it is not, and when it is not, no one will care, becaus…
I've read enough history to be convinced that democratic-anything is usually better. Social media is a more democratic medium than traditional media. On the whole, that will turn out for the better, especially as we learn how to control the worst aspects of social media. Before Facebook came out, how much did news reporters, even on MSNBC, lead the conversation against systematic social and economic injustice towards…
How did you come to this conclusion? Legitimately asking because I'd draw the opposite conclusion.