Chronotope’s Twitter Archive—№ 75,590

The problem isn't that social media provides us with tools of mass amplification. The problem is that those tools are too few.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 2 Retweets ❤️ 2 Favorites 2017 Jan 25 Mood -4 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
Which is to say, the amplification effect isn't bad, but the bias of the tools of amplification against professionals is harmful.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets 2017 Jan 25 Mood 0

…in reply to @Chronotope
Only Facebook theoretically includes professional tools of amplification for its network, and even than not really.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets 2017 Jan 25 Mood 0

…in reply to @Chronotope
The central thesis is supposedly that gatekeepers are bad, so lets demolish them, but in practice, the results are far different...
On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Jan 25 Mood -3 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
The current structure of social network optimizes for individual citizens, but in doing so it optimizes against expertise.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 2 Retweets ❤️ 2 Favorites 2017 Jan 25 Mood 0

…in reply to @Chronotope
Social networks that are built to amplify individuals past gatekeepers also hurt individuals who build expertise not on those networks.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 3 Favorites 2017 Jan 25 Mood -2 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
If you spend all day doing scientific research, you're not well equipped to use amplification tools as well as someone who just does social
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets 2017 Jan 25 Mood 0

…in reply to @Chronotope
In our original media structure, professional media provided the counterbalance to individual conversations and beliefs.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 2 Retweets ❤️ 2 Favorites 2017 Jan 25 Mood 0

…in reply to @Chronotope
In this way, the amplification effects of the water-cooler were balanced by professional media amplifying experts. But balance has broken
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Jan 25 Mood 0

…in reply to @Chronotope
A central methodology of social networks is to amplify humans over organizations. This has continually held true...
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets 2017 Jan 25 Mood +2 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
The water-cooler crowd is louder than experts. But also no longer sufficiently amplified, the expert amplification is selected against.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets 2017 Jan 25 Mood -1 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
In other words: the natural form of our modern social networks is anti-intellectual, anti-expert. It promotes--enshrines--this as a method
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 2 Retweets ❤️ 2 Favorites 2017 Jan 25 Mood +1 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
We used the wrong metaphor: it isn't just gatekeepers & kept. There's also amplification & amplified. 2 sets intersect but are not the same.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Jan 25 Mood -2 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
The media landscape is clearly broken, but a big reason is because, without the capability to amplify experts to the level of your buds...
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets 2017 Jan 25 Mood +2 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
Social networks force media to become the things your water-cooler amplifies. Expertise has no special tools of amplification
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets 2017 Jan 25 Mood -1 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
So this problem is worth examining from another angle. The solution will never ever be forcing social networks to de-amplify someone.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets 2017 Jan 25 Mood +1 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
Instead the solution must be to provide additional tools of amplification.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Jan 25 Mood +1 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
We have to find ways to hit information networks harder, outside of their rules we have to build new, modern, tools of mass amplification.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Jan 25 Mood 0

…in reply to @Chronotope
These tools can't just be to impact social networks, but that *has* to be part of it, which means:
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Jan 25 Mood 0

…in reply to @Chronotope
That the needs of media are counter to the primary metaphor of social networks. We can fix them, but they will never help us in our efforts.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets 2017 Jan 25 Mood +2 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
If you want to know what tools your media co should be building, the answer is: get massive, cheaply. New mass amplification breaks rules.
Permalink On twitter.com 2017 Jan 25 Mood +1 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
The new tools of mass amplification have to break the rules because the rules are built on bad assumptions. The rules are anti-intellectual.
Permalink On twitter.com 2017 Jan 25 Mood -3 🙁

Search tweets' text