-
The nature of social virality can create disproportionate media responses to minor voices, which looks ugly (like a punching down pile on) & distorts original intent. Like the 500 follower account embedded into a BuzzFeed article, few authors intend to write for wide distributionPermalink On twitter.com
♻️ 1 Retweets
❤️ 6 Favorites
Mood -3 🙁
-
You can argue that everyone who writes on the internet should plan on each thing going viral, but we've seen that even the most experienced in that regard can slip back to writing for their immediate audience, which has particular knowledge, expectations, and reactions.On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood -1 🙁
-
What's intended as a winking joke can be purposely or accidentally misconstrued, a discussion intended with particular boundaries or for only a particular community can be pulled outside that context and deformed through unintended consumption as a result.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood -2 🙁
-
Few, outside regular writers for our largest digital publications, know that they should, or even how they should, write for wide distribution. Part of the charm of the internet is writing for your community. Older writers, who grew on print, might understand this less.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood +3 🙂
-
Regardless, before writing about content, publications should follow the same policy with minor web media that they do with a 500 follower Twitter account. Talk to the author and make their context and intent part of the discussion. The alternative makes you look like a bully.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood 0
-
(Arguably, if you are a Twitter user with a very large platform, you should follow a similar policy. Not all voices intend to be amplified)Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood 0
-
(Sometimes people can even want to go viral but, without training or experience, not understand how it works or the potential consequences and that should be considered too.)Permalink On twitter.com
Mood +1 🙂