This story about Elmo spreading democracy-threatening election misinfo on Twitter is precisely why everyone needs to treat that platform like the pariah it is. No, you sticking around to counter the misinfo won't help. That's like raking leaves in a wind storm. And yes, I know there's community there, but mingling there does you and all of us more harm than good.
The most effective thing you can do is stop giving Twitter oxygen and allowing it to become just another fringe outlet, like 4chan or Daily Caller. With the very real prospect Trump will retake the White House, this stuff matters.
@dangoodin I mostly left in November 2022 but kept peeking at it. Deleted my account so I would stop, and now refuse to click Twitter links. The good people who are still there need a plan to leave
Okay. Please do not call Musk "Elmo". I thought you were describing a right-wing abuse of a beloved children's TV puppet character. I had a shock reaction.
It's simple, you're cutting off the badly needed oxygen supply of a platform that currently shapes the beliefs and attitudes of millions of moderate-leaning people. Currently, Twitter has influence with these folks. By ostracizing it, Twitter loses this influence.
Don't mistake the fascists that Elmo makes trend for the actual audience. The actual audience is global, diverse, overwhelmingly working class, and not fascists. We snub them at or peril.
we don't need to snub them, we need to make the fediverse competitive and impossible to buy out. our goal should be to demolish the corporate "commons" and replace it with a real one.
Elmo doesn't make one dime off me. In fact, I cost him money. He pays for the bandwidth that I détourné. I could never pay for that much reach out of my own pocket.
The lifeblood of all social media sites is engagement. Without it, the sites die, as was the case with MySpace and Friendster. Every time you argue with someone, no matter your intention, you increase the site's network effects meaning you incentivize others to do the same. In turn you and all the people you incentivize are exposed to ads, which whether you read them or not, generate revenue for the site. The more ads you're exposed to the more revenue it gets. Your continued tweeting is most definitely generating revenue for Twitter, and it's much more than a few measly dimes. You don't seem to know much about how the business and revenue models of social media work.
I like the fediverse, but it is in no way diverse. Also, it has a pro-war party line that I personally find odious. I hold my nose and read the other stuff I find here. I post my opposition to the bloodbath in Ukraine and the existence of the state of Israel on Xitter, where it is allowed, and reaches a broad, vast, and diverse audience, which this place does not.
Your like or dislike of Mastodon has nothing to do with this argument. Your engagement on Twitter gives badly needed oxygen to it. Despite your intentions, you continuing to tweet allows this toxic platform to generate revenue and increase its main-stream appeal. What you think about the fediverse is irrelevant to this phenomenon.
@dangoodin How do you tell journalists who are only on twitter to update their presence somewhere else?
Cuz that is kinda the problem: there is a small amount of community on twitter and it is hard to get journalists (specifically, not exclusively but IMO it is the journalists who are really missing on other platforms) to switch to something else that does not have that same community feel?
I wish I knew. If journalists with big followings left, most of their followers would too. Twitter is so hostile to the principles of a free press. The journalists still clinging to the platform seem to be suffering from an accute case of Stockholm Syndrome.
And to be clear, I'm not saying anyone should delete their accounts. They should, however, used Twitter sparingly, if at all.
Add comment