Spoiler: Maybe Musk did us a favor by disrupting Twitter and forcing us to consider better social media alternatives.
Warning: This may get gossipy with some of my personal social media anecdotes.
I: Social Media Encourages Demagoguery
Democracy Needs a Functioning Public Sphere
Social Media Can (and Often Does) Serve a Public Good
Social media allows communities to form. Twitter has become (among other things) a place to discuss current events. It’s a place where writers can find an audience. Important voices that we might never hear can be amplified. We can talk to experts and make new acquaintances. Citizens can talk directly to elected officials. We can get news reporting in real-time from journalists on the ground and in the courthouses. People’s lives have been saved because of information posted on social media. Perpetrators have been brought to justice because of information posted to social media.
But unfortunately, social media and the Internet are not all good.
Social Media In Its Current Form Amplifies and Enables Demagoguery
The advent of the Internet has been compared to the invention of the printing press. The printing press gave more people access to information—which is good—but a sudden change in how people get information can be destabilizing. Yale history professor Timothy Snyder points out that the Protestant Reformation was enabled by the printing press, and the resulting wars devastated Europe.
Harvard Professor Cass Sunstein, in his 2017 book, #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media, argues that the Internet and social media are threatening democracy by driving political fragmentation, polarization, and even extremism.
It takes time to readjust after a major disruption. We’re currently in a period of adjustment.
Example #1: The Internet Research Agency
Americans learned about the Internet Research Agency (IRA) from an indictment filed by Robert Mueller and a Senate Report.
The IRA was founded in 2014 in St. Petersburg to spread disinformation and sow discord in democracies. During the 2016 American presidential election cycle, IRA agents operated thousands of social media accounts, created social media pages, and organized groups designed to attract US audiences. During the election cycle, tens of millions of Americans interacted with Russian-operated accounts, not knowing that the accounts were operated in St. Petersburg.
The IRA even staged real events in the US. Using a Facebook page called “Heart of Texas” which had attracted over 250,000 followers, IRA agents organized a “Stop Islamization of Texas” event in 2016 in front of the Islamic Da’wah Center in Houston. At the same time, IRA operatives used their “United Muslims for America” Facebook page with 325,000 followers to promote a second event, to be held at the same time in the same place called “Save Islamic Knowledge.” Protesters from both sides showed up and, as was the intention of the Russians, violence broke out. The competing events were covered live by local news agencies. They didn’t know both protests had been organized by Russian operators.
The Trust Building Technique: IRA agents, posing as Americans, built trust in their American audience, then deployed payload content. Here’s an example of how it works: IRA agents posted Biblical verses on a page designed to attract White Evangelicals. White Evangelicals who were attracted to the site believed they were interacting with like-minded Americans. After building their trust, the IRA agents posted lies about Hillary Clinton.
To take another example, IRA agents carried on conversations that other users could see, pretending to be Americans discussing politics. In the lead-up to the 2016 elections, IRA agents pretended to be Black Americans explaining to each other why Black Americans should stay home and not vote.
Example #2: Cambridge Analytica
In 2014, contractors and employees of Mercer-owned Cambridge Analytica stole the private Facebook data of tens of millions of users. Cambridge Analytica used the data to build user profiles so they could tailor their political propaganda to individual Facebook users to elicit maximum engagement.
Social media platforms continue to use the personal information culled about you to direct content to you that it believes will elicit your engagement.
Angry Divisive Content Gets More Engagement
In her congressional testimony, Facebook whistleblower Francis Haugen explained that angry, polarizing content generates more engagement on social media. In other words, 🔥 generates more engagement than 🤔.
(It has always seemed to me that democracy needs more🤔and less🔥.)
Because Facebook operates for profit, it seeks to maximize engagement. Haugen thus explained that:
“The result has been a system that amplifies division, extremism, and polarization—and undermines societies around the world. In some cases, this dangerous online talk has led to actual violence that harms and even kills people . . . These problems have been confirmed repeatedly by Facebook’s own internal research.”
In a 60 Minutes interview, Haugen said that content producers and political parties are aware that the best way to generate engagement is to deploy angry and divisive content.
This is why people who are monetizing their social media feeds are often the ones writing content that arouses your emotions. Rage-inducing content helps the content provider by attracting a large audience. It also helps the social media platform by increasing overall engagement. Rage-generators and for-profit social media platforms thus have a common goal: Keep people riled and angry, thus driving polarization and extremism.
Trust-Building, American Style (true stories, names omitted)
Person #1 gained a huge following on Twitter in 2015 as a staunch Democrat tweeting things like “Vote Blue No Matter Who.” After Trump was elected, his following increased when he declared himself a leader of the Democratic “resistance” on Twitter: A large loosely-organized group that opposed Trump. Person #1 was a compelling Tweeter and effectively dunked on Trump. As a result, his following grew to more than 350,000. He began monetizing his feed with podcasts and a Patreon account.
Then, about halfway through Trump’s term, he turned on Pelosi. He called Democrats “corporatists” and accused them of corruption. He encouraged his followers to abandon the Democratic Party. Because he had a large, influential account and was now Tweeting rage-inducing material, his account drew even more attention, thus driving the algorithms and increasing his reach.
Whether he deliberately built trust in his target audience with the goal of turning them against the Democratic Party, or whether he entirely changed his political views after building his audience, we’ll never know.
He continues monetizing his feed, now milking former Democrats who he has turned into angry, disaffected Democrats.
Person #2 did the same. She has a Ph.D. in anthropology (she is not a professor) and positioned herself as the single person who predicted Trump’s rise as an authoritarian. She amassed a large following on social media. (There were actual professors at major universities who had been predicting the rise of Trump as an authoritarian, but they were not on social media so she took all the credit.) Because she so effectively attacked Trump, Democrats loved her. She was invited onto TV shows.
Then she turned against the Democrats.
Personal encounter: When she turned on Nancy Pelosi in 2018 and accused Pelosi of taking Russian money, people on Twitter kept telling her she should read my feed because I had a different view of Pelosi. (I never talked to her or about her.) She responded by telling her hundreds of thousands of followers that I was a “faux expert” and a racist (she posted a screenshot of a tweet of mine out of context) and said I was in league with Stephen Miller.
She now tells her almost 600,000 followers that Merrick Garland is corrupt and compromised and is a “mafia state enabler.” She keeps her followers terrified, monetizes her feed, and turns on anyone who questions her. (I always felt there was an irony in the fact that she positions herself as an expert on authoritarianism.)
Person #3: About a year ago, a well-known fiction writer without any background in law or government began tweeting furiously that Merrick Garland was “refusing” to indict Trump. He now has more than 800,000 followers who repeat his assertions as if they are facts. (One time I tried to point out a factual error in one of his tweets. He responded by blocking me.)
Twitter Algorithms Help Large Accounts Grow Larger, Further Incentivizing Rage-Inducing Material
After a Twitter account reaches a certain size and generates a certain level of engagement, Twitter algorithms further amplify the account by suggesting it to others.
Twitter also offers an “analytics” button telling users which of their Tweets got the most engagement, thus encouraging people to Tweet content likely to generate more engagement.
Main Stream / Cable News Affected
The Internet and the rise in social media have also spurred changes in mainstream news sources because mainstream sources now have to compete for clicks and viewers. In the old days, people got their news from the same sources: An evening news program (I’m old enough to remember Walter Cronkite) and a newspaper delivered to the house. With more competition, and a public demand to be entertained, mainstream news often presents “experts” who simply reflect back the fears and beliefs of the audience. Peter Arenella, a law professor emeritus (UCLA Law) whose specialty is criminal law and criminal procedure, was also one of the first TV legal pundits for ABC news, which gives him a unique perspective on TV Legal Punditry. He says that “today’s pundits often act as appeasers instead of educators. They reflect back and reinforce the views of the audience, thereby entertaining their audiences instead of educating them, and thereby misleading them.”
Rage-Inducing Simplifications
Yale professor Timothy Snyder talks about what he calls Internet Memes, which he defines as something a person sees on the Internet, feels triggered by, and then repeats. People see these triggers because they are directed at them through algorithms. They are then transformed into repeaters of targeted memes.
The problem with Internet Memes, according to Snyder, is that they prevent us from thinking complex thoughts. Snyder finds this terrifying because democracy depends on us having “some sense of time beyond our immediate outrage.” In Orwell’s 1984, the fictionalized totalitarian government worked on reducing the number of words in the language. Snyder points out that Internet Memes do the same thing by reducing our ability to have complex thoughts.
My First “Viral” Twitter Thread
The thread is here. The story is this: In 2018, a double jeopardy (criminal law) case was heading to the Supreme Court. A reputable and ordinarily excellent journalist misunderstood something fundamental about the case. The headline writers gave her piece a misleading headline. People got the (wrong) idea that the case, Gamble v. US, would allow Trump to pardon himself and his associates for state crimes as well as federal crimes.
Twitter had a meltdown. A well-known actress with about 500,000 followers Tweeted something like “The Supreme Court is about to give Trump and his friends Get Out Of Jail Free cards.” (She has since deleted that Tweet.)
About a dozen people came to me, in a rage-filled panic. I asked for a few hours to read about the case. I came back and wrote this thread. There was some backstage drama when I found myself in a private conversation with several members of the “resistance” and the actress. I tried to correct the misunderstanding of the case. The actress told me that a lawyer on the US Senate staff told her that the case was about Trump being able to pardon his associates for state crimes. I asked for the name of the lawyer because I didn’t believe her. She refused to give me the name. People on the call sided with her. You get the idea. The conversation didn’t go well.
It took about 10 months for the Supreme Court to reach a decision in Gamble v. US. When it turned out I was right, I went back to look at the actress’s feed. She had deleted her alarmist Tweets about the case.
I’ve thus become a person on Twitter who explains the complex legalities to counter the latest rage-inducing simplification. I wrote my FAQ page to address this year’s rage-inducing simplifications about the DOJ investigation.
I put a lot of work into these. I have often joked that my task on social media has been to try to put out forest fires with a squirt gun.
Don’t get me wrong: There are real things to worry about. Democracy is in danger from right-wing extremism. But keeping people in a state of panic by means of rage-inducing simplifications is not productive, particularly when based on fundamental misunderstandings about the law and how our government works. Constant panic and rage lead to fatigue and burnout, and eventually cynicism and apathy. If people are burned out and apathetic, how will they have the energy or will to do the work to save democracy? How can people organize or think rationally with their hair on fire?
Plato argued that democracy is fragile because it is vulnerable to demagoguery. He warned that democracy is destined to fail because most people don’t have the ability to analyze or understand the complex business of government. Social media is making this worse.
Then along came Elon Musk with an agenda to turn Twitter into a right-wing propaganda network. While looking for alternatives, it occurred to me that it might be possible for social media to stop being a hotbed for conspiracy theories, disinformation, and panic-mongering.
Wouldn’t it be better if nobody set the fires in the first place?
II. An update on Twitter, Elon Musk Style
The above makes little sense other than to assert that content Musk deems “negative” will be “deboosted” (whatever that means). At the same time, Musk allowed Donald Trump back onto Twitter and said he will reinstate accounts that were banned for violent threats, harassment, racism, and the spread of disinformation. Accounts he wants to bring back include the Babylon Bee, which was banned for targeting transgender people.
People who don’t want to be associated with right-wing radicalization are leaving Twitter, along with 50 of Twitter’s top 100 advertisers. Meanwhile, right-wing radicals are signing up.
Note: I am staying on Twitter for now. I feel an obligation to the people there who look to me for analysis. But I am establishing myself elsewhere because it appears that Twitter will soon be a place we don’t want to be. But there are still important voices there and I am not ready to entirely cede the territory.
III. Alternatives to Twitter
Google, Amazon, and other companies that would have the infrastructure to create a Twitter alternative have no desire to mire themselves in a political hotbed with little prospect of becoming profitable.
At this point, the two alternatives to Twitter getting the most attention: Mastodon and Post.news.
About Post.news
You can read about Post.news here.
Disadvantage: Post.news is a place to discuss current events. Twitter is much broader. On Twitter there are communities of writers, gardeners, etc. While there is some overlap–for example, a community of political activists might be at home on a news site–it’s not clear that there is a place on Post.news for a large segment of Twitter users who are there for reasons other than news, but don’t want to be pummelled with right-wing messaging or support a site that gives a voice to racists.
Advantage: No ads. Post.news was founded by the former CEO of Waze Noam Bardin, and thus a person with prior success with tech products. Waze monetizes with ads. Post.news, however, sees the danger of ads on social media. This is from the Post.news information page:
Instead of monetizing through ads, the Post.news idea is for users to pay for access to “premium content.” I assume this means The Washington Post and not The Babylon Bee, which requires someone to decide what is or isn’t “premium.”
If the idea works, it will direct money where it should go: Good journalism.
It’s not clear what fees will be imposed later, but from this interview (the interview with Bardin starts about halfway), it sounds like Post.news is an alternative to subscribing to newspapers. It seems like there’s a “pay as you go” idea, which is not the same as the public sphere, although there can be overlap. You pay to read the news (not a public square) but then you can talk about what you read. Now, on Twitter, people often only read headlines, which can induce rage and misunderstandings. The Post.news premise is that people are willing to pay a small amount to read articles and get past the paywall. From this interview, it sounds like a few cents per article. Presumably, the site keeps some and the publisher gets some.
When I got off the Post.news waitlist and logged in, I learned I was starting with a bonus of 50 free “points,” which can be used to “tip” people or pay for articles.
The idea is for people to spend time on the platform and leave feeling smarter, not angrier. Specifically, Bardin said, “Enrichment, not enragement.”
Advantage: Because the platform will be owned by a single entity and run for profit, it is likely to be user-friendly and inviting because a platform run for profit needs lots of users.
Disadvantage: Because the platform will be owned by a single entity and run for profit, there is always the risk that a change in ownership or management will bring unwelcome changes. The danger increases on a site run for profit. The post.news of today may not be the post.news of tomorrow.
This was posted on Mastodon:
While the promise of a user-friendly platform is appealing, Post.news raises a fundamental question: Is it good for the public sphere to be privately owned and run for profit?
This brings us to Mastodon, which is essentially a bunch of independently operated servers that communicate with each other. It thus has the advantages and disadvantages of site not centrally-owned or run for profit.
About Mastodon
Mastodon launched in 2016 when German software developer Eugen Rochko (working for a nonprofit) didn’t like Twitter so he wrote the Mastodon code, and made it public. Yup, he gave it away. Anyone can use it. Anyone can improve it.
This means that anyone can operate their own Mastodon server. People can also join a server that is open to new users. If the server is on this list, you can join. These servers depend on community donations. Each server makes its own rules. If you open an account on one server, and you don’t like it, you can move to a different server and take all your followers with you.
There are no algorithms on Mastodon, which decreases the incentive to produce inflammatory, rage-inducing content.
To show you an example of how this can work, a group of journalists led by Adam Davidson of the The New Yorker established a server for journalists. They vet their members, so you know that anyone with “journa.host” after their names has been vetted by Davidson and his partners.
To follow Davidson and any of the other journalists on journa.host, you can create an account on any of the servers open to anyone. You then interact with them the same way you do on Twitter. You can follow them, comment on their posts, “like” their posts (it’s called “favorite” on Mastodon) or retweet (called “reboost” on Mastodon.)
Here are the advantages for Davidson and his journalist colleagues:
- He and his friends own their own data. Nobody can sell their personal information.
- They make their own rules. They can block anyone they want from their server. They can forbid the use of certain words. Their server, their rules.
- If their server runs well, anyone who follows them or comments on their posts will have a smooth experience.
- They don’t have to live in fear that a corporate overlord will suddenly wreak havoc on their professional lives.
- There is no “quote tweet” on Mastodon (I don’t know about Post.news).
For an interesting take on how the quote-tweet encourages dunking and drives polarization and extremism, see this article by Matt Tait.
Disadvantages:
- They have to monitor the content on their server. The more users they have, the harder this gets.
- They also have to pay the bill. For a sense of the cost of having your own server, click here. If you can do the technical work yourself, the cost is about the same as maintaining a word press website. It isn’t prohibitively expensive. It’s work intensive. (Like a functioning public sphere.)
To take another example, a startup company with 10 engineers and 3 marketing people can set up its own Mastodon server. This gives each member a social media platform. They don’t have to worry about anyone selling their data, blitzing their customers or followers with ads, or allowing Nazis and other creeps onto their comments.
Your neighborhood gardening club can have a server if you all want to chip in. If you (or someone in your group) can do the technical back-end work, the cost is minimal. You can get one for your extended family. Your political activist group can have one. (You are a member of a political activist group, right?)
Here’s an interesting take on why your organization should have its own server.
But what about the bad guys? What keeps them from forming their own server?
Nothing. But your server simply has to block their server and there is an impenetrable wall.
In fact, this is just what happened. A bunch of Nazis and white supremacists opened their own server called Gab. Every single server on this list has Gab blocked, and any new server is advised to immediately block Gab. So the Gab Nazis are completely isolated. You will never see anything they post and they will never see anything you post. The only way a Nazi can see your stuff is if they join a normal server and hide the fact that they are Nazis, but once their Nazi-ness shows, zap. The owner of your server, who doesn’t tolerate Nazis (that’s why you are there) blocks them and they’re gone.
In fact, did you know that Trump’s Truth Social uses Mastodon code? Trump, being Trump, tried to pretend that he created it, but the creators of Mastodon let everyone know that Trump basically used their free-to-the-public code. In other words, Trump is not a tech genius. He was doing the tech world equivalent of plagiarizing.
Mastodon is Messy
Different servers have different rules. It isn’t clear what a server’s rules are when you join. I see people on Twitter say, “Mastodon is confusing. The customer service is terrible. They need to get their acts together.” Here’s the thing: There is no “they.” There is no person in charge. Nobody is promising that the trains will run on time. It’s like democracy that way. It’s messy. We’re on our own, for better or for worse.
Mastodon is not a good place to Monetize
I suspected that Mastodon was not a good place to monetize, so I checked with Professor Google. When I used the search terms “Branding,” “monetizing,” and “Mastodon,” a few articles came up explaining that Mastodon isn’t good for branding, but when I tried to click on them, I hit a paywall, which told me what I needed to know.
The public sphere is not supposed to be a place to make money. It’s a place to exchange ideas.
Things I like About Both Post.news and Mastodon
- Twitter allows 270 characters per post. Mastodon’s default allows 500. Individual servers can change that. Post.news has no limits. Longer posts encourage thoughtful content and discourage EVERYONE NEEDS TO SET THEIR HAIR ON FIRE RIGHT NOW one-liners.
- Mastodon has an edit button. (I assume Post.news does, but I don’t know yet.) The Twitter rationale for not offering an edit is, “What if a bunch of people like it and then the original poster goes back and adds something creepy?” The answer is, “So what? We’re not a bunch of babies. We value good content, which occasionally requires correction.” If you edit on Mastodon, users can see previous versions, which prevents dishonest editing.
- When you look at someone’s Tweet, you instantly see how much engagement a Tweet has, which stimulates “lots of people liked this, I wonder why,” instead of “this content sounds interesting.” It seems to me this makes it easier to ignore the hair-on-fire oneliner rage inducers. This doesn’t happen on Mastodon. (I don’t know about Post.com.)
So, which is better?
Why not both?
If you’re on Post.news, you can follow me here.
You can find me on my new Mastodon server, here. (I‘m still in the process of transferring my data over, so it’s sort of threadbare now.)
There was a time when I posted on both Facebook and Twitter. I see no reason why I can’t post on Mastodon and Post.news. Why not hedge our bets?
My own server.
As an experiment, I had my in-house technical support staff (my husband) set up a Mastodon server for me. I’ll have more information on that later.
Cool? Right now I’m the only user, which makes content moderation easy😉. It’s also super easy to get a consensus on which rules to adopt. My server, my rules.
Happy Thanksgiving Weekend.
I am thankful for my readers, who give me a reason to write. JJ is thankful for seagulls to chase. (The seagulls are like, “Yeah, dude, keep barking,” and they fly away)
I am thankful for JJ’s 24/7 security protection. I have never been attacked by a seagull.
Best wishes from the central California coast.
Thank you Teri. This was a really good read. I am on a waitlist for Post but am leary of some of the disadvantages you enumerate. I really like Mastodon more and more. I requested to follow you there but not sure if it’s your own server or not. I assume you’ll let us know if we need to do something different to see your posts there.
You should be able to follow me here: @Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
Thanks
I cracked up when you described your work as putting out a forest fire with a squirt gun. There is an actual technique (mostly used for mop up, but still!) that is very like that. Love from the fire crew fam.
Two latest of the late: Empty Wheel et al published a short essay on how the “punk crustbar” got converted to the Nazi bar, and speculated on the collateral damage and the message it sends to stay in said Nazi bar.
Also Musk is said to run around saying “Vox populi, vox dei.” He canNOT have the context of that. The title Vox Populi, Vox Dei was … borrowed in a Jacobite pamphlet to argue against the Whigs in 1719, resulting in the hanging of the young printer John Matthews.”
Be careful what you ask for?
On bullet II, that makes perfect sense now I digested the ramifications. Often I will tweet something to an individual, you, Tom Nichols, Lawfare, Laurence Tribe, etc with at least one question of something I clearly wished a response to. Nada, esp since the spoiled 13 yr old took over. I was perfectly respectful, intelligent but nothin. Similarly I routinely never saw current tweets fom ppl I followed. I usually found them by accident below tweets from people I don’t know that were 24+ hrs old. Twitter is in serious need of architecture help. After reading pt II, it makes perfect sense. It’s by design! FFS! People I send comments or questions to never or rarely see it because of algorithmic manipulation. Either neither one of us are important or I am not worthy to be placed on their TL.
That was outstandingly good Teri, thank you so much!!
I didn’t realize Mastodon rented/hosted pre-configured images.
I also didn’t realize that’s all TS was. Maybe Barron did the configuration.
Again, thanks!
Thank you as always for your thoughtful posts. Reading this one I was reminded of Neal Postman’s great book Amusing Ourselves to Death – have you read it? It described the dangers of conflating news and entertainment. While written before social media (it focuses on television) it feels incredibly prescient. I, too, am remaining on Twitter (though my tweets are now protected and I’m mostly seeking out/posting non-political stuff) and on Post (though I find it way too much like the worst of Twitter to enjoy – too lacking in important functionality to encourage true engagement and community-building, still seemingly prioritizing massive accounts that rage post while making the rest of us feel like we’re invisible)… for now. But eventually I’ll have to limit where I spend my time as my bandwidth is not infinite. My hunch is that Facebook (where my account is private and so I only interact with people I know IRL or their IRL friends, which makes for pleasant and meaningful engagement) and Mastodon will win out. I am really enjoying the Mastodon community. The onboarding is clunky and it’s difficult to find specific accounts but it’s super easy to find affinity communities (searchable hashtags) and curate multiple feeds that you can follow simultaneously. The diversity of my feeds (politics! food! photography! punk rock history!) is amazing and thanks to my actively administered instance (@federate.social) everyone I encounter is lovely and eager to have an actual conversation, not just yell pithy observations at each other. That plus the great substacks to which I’ve subscribed and actual paid newspaper and magazine subscriptions (!!) can nicely round out my media universe if/when Twitter finally bites the dust.
I need to read it. Thanks.
Thank you for your always insightful analysis. Sorry for this long message, but I do have a couple of questions about the definition offered and an assumption in this piece.
You say that “Democracy needs a functioning public sphere” and define it to include “a communication infrastructure”. Is that last part new? Where was that communication infrastructure before Twitter, which has only been around sixteen years? I’m 65, and I don’t remember anything similar existing before. Was it the letters to the editor column in local newspapers, another well-known place for cranks to air their views (which papers often published for the same reason social media lets folks rant – it sold papers)? Have we now unwittingly redefined “public sphere” to mean a technology that gives people some sort of right to public amplification of whatever they think they think?
Twitter, a for-profit entity, doesn’t seem so much a town square as a rowdy dive bar whose owner allows patrons to scream as loudly as they want because it sells more drinks. Is this what’s now considered necessary for democracy to function? If so, why wasn’t it necessary seventeen years ago? How did democracy get along without it, and in a rather more genteel manner? To me, as someone who doesn’t use social media and is on the outside looking in, this is all beginning to sound like a back-formation to justify a substance dependency.
Sticking with my bar analogy, to those people who are staying on Twitter to fight the good fight, I’d say that when most folks in the bar, along with the bartender, are slapping on Nazi armbands and Klan hoods, continuing to buy drinks there seems less than noble.
I hope you can offer some thoughts about these questions, because I’m honestly perplexed by the feverish assumption that Twitter or something like it is now a necessity, the claims that it’s become a sort of public utility, etc.
(As an aside, for those fleeing to Mastodon – I hope you all respect Mastodon’s design and mission, and don’t act like upper-class gentrifiers, trying to change it into that which you fled. A relative who’s used Mastodon since its beginning is getting really peeved at this.)
Thanks for bearing with this long message, and for your powerful work.
“Public sphere” is a term from sociology. See: https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199756841/obo-9780199756841-0030.xml
“Infrastructure” is probably misleading but the idea is that you don’t need an actual place to meet. It can be virtual.
Does that help?
Thanks. I understand the meaning of “public sphere”, and I understand that a meeting place can now be virtual. But we seem to be discussing this type of Internet-based “town square” as a given. I’m asking, why do we think we *need* anything resembling Twitter (or frankly Facebook and other social media) as part of our political discourse when we got along without it up until the last couple of decades, and certainly more civilly? Why have we decided this is a necessity? Is it just because it’s existed for a few years and we can’t imagine life without it? (I sure can!) This is why I compared it to the arguments a substance abuser uses to justify the dependency. I’m wondering if there’s a more basic discussion to be had here.
Thanks again for responding.
We don’t need it, but it did a lot of good for a lot of people. It’s something people want.
Communities formed on Twitter, particularly Black communities that didn’t have a voice. They want to reform. They have that right. There is no “we” who decides what is needed.
Cal Newport’s latest podcast, which I just found, makes the same argument that no, we don’t “need” Twitter, and also points to your comment about the communities formed on Twitter – there are other ways to do that that do not involve the for-profit engagement engineering. As you’re probably seeing with Mastodon, it is not a Twitter replacement and yet can offer the community-building tools without the toxicity.
https://www.buzzsprout.com/1121972?client_source=large_player&iframe=true&referrer=https://www.buzzsprout.com/1121972.js?player=large&contaier_id=buzzsprout-large-player-1121972#
But you see, I think it could be a Twitter replacement if major organizations start their own Mastodon servers. Suppose Meidas Touch had a server. That would solve problems for people. They would feel comfortable joining the server. Everyone would be on board with content moderation.
Suppose Washington Post had its own server. You’d have to subscribe to the newspaper to read more than the free 15 articles, but their reporters would have the same exposure.
Post.news will only succeed if major publishers go along with micropayments, and I can’t see that happening.
On the other hand, a critical shift in users could make Mastodon a better Twitter.
It all depends on what people do, which is true of most things, right?
Wow Brian, you made me think about you question. What existed before Twitter?, AOL, MSDN (or MSN?). I’m a smidge older than you and have been in software development my entire career, I’m retired now. One observation I made before I retired in 2013 was “mankind will rue the day they consumerized the Internet”.It was actually birthed in an academic /research environment, DARPANet, late 70s. First, non government/academic users were commercial venues to reduce paper flow and convert manual processes to electronic. I was at Monster.com when they held an all-hands mtg about using this thing called Twitter for customer engagement. My first question was, “what the … is a retweet”? That was 2011ish. Writing TCP/IP based apps and few could articulate TCP from UDP. If you could, great employment opportunities awaited. And of course before household Internet there was dialup and dialup didn’t lend itself to hours long missives.
Thank you, Walt! I was hoping people would remember that none of this existed more than 20 years ago, so why do we think that we MUST have something like this?
Yes, I made the same prediction when the money-makers started moving into the Internet – inevitable in a hypercapitalist state, I suppose. In fact, I worked for a law firm that was focused on dotcom companies, and when that all came crashing down, I said to one of my lawyers, “So this is partly our fault, isn’t it?” And he replied, “Yup.”
I’m extremely grateful for Teri’s very detailed explanations. So glad I found her on Twitter.
Before social media, a few well-informed individuals provided “reliable” information to ‘communities without privilege’. There was hardly any ability to affect reform with such limited dissemination of information.
For-profit activities is the base of the general economy and contributes to the underlying issue with many methods for disseminating information. Communication entities have a prioritized agenda. Monetizing information vehicles is not new, nor is demagoguery.
Through social media, minority communities gained the ability to reach broader groups. This allowed people to take part in conversations despite their very full lives. (I mean working class people who were otherwise engaged with the necessities of daily living with little time for research.) By using social media, their larger community became more convenient. Whether we like it or not, many people prefer to gather virtually, especially those under 35.
I’m over 65 and prefer to focus on making good use of what I can while staying active in real life.
Thank you for this and for all you post on the birb site and now on Mastodon, where I have already found you. You are one of the voices of sanity I count on along with a handful of others, which I’m sure you can guess. FWIW I could guess 2 out of the 3 examples of people who went off the rails and started behaving like authoritarians while criticizing them along with the democrats. I’ve muted and unfollowed them.
Thanks again for all you share with us. I’m still making my mind up about Post, but getting to like Heffalump quite a bit.
It’s funny that I know who all three of your anonymous grifters are. I unfollowed #1 a couple years ago after his schtick became tiresome. I’ve been QT attacked by #3 for replying to a tweet that wasn’t his and didn’t mention him, even though I’m a nobody with <200 followers. As for the lady, she's harder for me to quit entirely. But I take your point about her.
“I don’t see a way to gift this from my subscription”
The New Yorker doesn’t do that. However, they allow folks to read one or a couple articles per month. I usually don’t hit that limit. I do look forward to post(dot)news signing up publishers and micro charging for each article read. Not quite ready for prime time. 🙁
Thank you again for your calm, funny, thoughtful & extremely well organized & useful blog post. Yours is actually the only one I visit regularly of the less than 1/2 dozen I visit at all! Not being a ‘creator’, i am not sure if or when i will ever get let in to Post, but I am on the list. Not ready to give private info Mastadon wants, but have started out on Counter-Social as they only require an email. Your blog, however, is firmly bookmarked! Thanks again for being a voice of logic, reason, truth & justice.
As usual, wonderful information and thought-provoking discussion. Thank you.
Hi Teri,
Thank you for your well-constructed thoughts. I will check out post (if I ever get off of the waitlist) but the idea of microtransactions for content bothers me, too. I like mastodon, thus far: It takes being more proactive to find content, but I don’t mind that so much.
I hope you & yours are well! Give JJ ear scritches from me, please!
This is so great, on so many levels. Thank you.
A while back I bought and read your Lincoln bio. I highly recommend it to anyone who might be reading this comment.
Thank you. Writing that series was such a privilege.
I have thought for yrs the same as you re loss of complex thinking since social media became so popular. Our social skills suffer as do our verbal skills. My sister & I discussed this last week. Now the R’s want to push the cause by banning books. Why are so many adults unaware what rage & panic can do to a person? It’s not difficult.
It’s profitable. They justify it by saying, “People need to be aware of what is happening!”
As someone who’s 1) mostly stuck in the 2000’s decade of social media (blogs, email etc), only occasionally reading Twitter / posting on Facebook…
…but who’s 2) an experienced software engineer,
I read with great interest the reports from yourself and others about this bleeding edge technology, especially listening for what the requirements would be for a well functioning public space. There’s a screaming need for something that works well, but this is what we’ve got so far.
So looking forward to your usual reporting, especially with the appointment of Jack Smith. Thanks again for all you do! And that central California beach looks so lovely – you don’t need to be a small dog running for joy to appreciate it.
Short and sweet: You are amazing. Thank you for all the research, clear-thinking, and time you put into your blog.
Have you heard about Common Ground Social? A member of my political activist group founded it, or is championing it, or something along those lines.
I joined Mastodon in early November. The first few days I thought it was hard and I couldn’t figure out why it was being recommended by so many. It was like a firehose at first, but after a couple of weeks I found that I was opening Mastodon often and Twitter rarely.
Starting out, it was hard to pick a server. The “obvious” ones (mstdn.social and mastodon.social) had closed their doors, and so I finally chose a social network with a simple name. I’m thrilled I joined that one: the first rule is “be excellent to each other” and, while its membership has grown astonishingly in the last month, it’s not as jam-packed with people as those “obvious” servers. (Now I know that they had closed their doors because they were overwhelmed with people signing up at rates like thousands per hour. Server performance has been an issue while owners tune and upgrade their hardware.)
An initial problem was that I didn’t know the rules of my server until I joined. Each server has a blurb on the Mastodon home page to tell the public about itself, but that’s it. I had to actually join to get to the rules. The other early problem is that it was sometimes hard to find the people that I knew or that I followed on Twitter. (People have now started sharing lists that make that a little easier.)
The good news is: once you join and you see what server people you follow are on, it’s fairly easy to switch servers. At first I thought about switching to a server where some of my friends are, but I’ve grown comfortable with my server and its moderation, so I’m staying put.
The other good news is that the flow of content soon presents new people posting interesting stuff. I’ve been helped by following some hashtags I enjoy (e.g., #StandingStoneSunday, #florespondence, #Colorado); now I see posts from people all over the “fediverse” that also enjoy the subject matter suggested by the hashtags.
Finally — I’m willing to post publicly on Mastodon! I never did that on Twitter because I didn’t want to deal with the trolls and other nasties.
This past week I finally deactivated my Twitter account. Bye Elon!
I have hopes for micro payments to publishers on post.news. I subscribe to 3 news papers and support a couple creators who make the world a better place and that is the limit of my budget. of course, the sources I *subscribe* to are the ones that I agree with. How am I to get thoughtful contrary opinion outside my bubble? Much of the good writing is behind pay walls that require subscription. It is just impractical (and I don’t want to) subscribe to all publishers. Subscriptions further our fragmented media. So, I have hopes that micro payments will make it easier for me to read outside my usual bubble, paying for good writing from opposing view points.
This is the most thoughtful, insightful consideration of social media I have yet read. Thank you for that. Something that is not being thought of: the work required to maintain Mastadon servers: what happens in a few years when Davidson (or any server owner) is fed up with the work and expense of curating? Anything resembling a town square will require effort (and staff) to maintain it. Isn’t a self-sustaining business a more durable choice than volunteers (no disrespect to the fabulous work of volunteers everywhere).?
I think there are pros and cons. For a small server, it’s like maintaining a wordpress site.
Great piece as always Teri. I look forward each week to your blog posts. I always learn a lot. Looking forward to your move from Twitter to Mastodon. I’m already there and it is not too bad once you get into the swing of it. So far I’ve found a lot of good people and interesting conversations. Hope you find the same.
Thanks
Dave
The “Garland is too slow” crowd has grown and now includes the “Jack Smith will have to start from the beginning” crowd. Ignorance thrives where thought has been excluded.
It’s so exhausting. Wouldn’t it be nice for them to be in their own bubble where they can’t confuse people?
I am so thankful I subscribed to your blogs. You provide so much helpful information. This post is so helpful. Did not know you wrote novels. Will check that out.
Thank you, Marge
I truly enjoyed the Square Table novels. They are YA and an easy read while inspiring. I haven’t tried the rest of Teri’s novels though your mention of them has got me thinking about it again.
Thank you. I really had fun writing the Square Table series. So glad you enjoyed it.
Thank you, Teri. Your thoughtful posts and blogs have talked me of the ledge many times. I so appreciate what you do.
I sincerely appreciate the effort and time it takes to write these kinds of articles. Where do you find the time??? It’s a true public service. Thank you.
A functioning town Square, certainly might be the way to reestablish facts in conversations. But I suppose everyone will be fighting for control of the town square. It seems government has a function here, but does not weigh in. I am mystified by this. I would love to be educated on the same if you’re looking for ideas for your next newsletter.
@cbouzy is going to start a social media platform. I asked him what values he was basing the platform on, he answered with an audio cast of a recent conversation with interested parties.
There were not many details articulated, but I do appreciate that he wants people of color and women working to build a platform so it’s more inclusive. A problem Post has now.
I’ve also been blocked by Don Winslow, for suggesting he listen to what you were saying (lol).
I’m on Mastodon as well as Post.
I have found mastodon to be very difficult, so good for you having your own server! My difficulties with Mastodon I’m sure are my own limitation and trying to curate a broad feed, finding the right people and hashtags is laborious.
I was very excited about Post, the first week went well given the bugs and hiccups. However, I have lost so much functionality on post due to the bugs, I’ve purchased points which I can’t use because I can’t see feeds and my own profile and Post help is unresponsive, so just like Twitter. Yes I know it’s beta, but I think there’s been an error in judgment letting too many people on to fast. Somethings seems to have broken.
And this point, I think I’m going to stick with newsletters and substack subscriptions
Recently a commenter on Twitter noted that it’s a public utility for the exchange of info & ideas, so how could a right winger like Elon take it over. It got me thinking as you say that government should have a function in managing the digital public square, but then I realize that’s impossible. One reason is Constitutional freedom of speech guarantees. Even more dangerous is that US administrations change and with that the bureaucracy charged with administrating & protecting. For example, look how trumpism corrupted DoJ, USPS, EPA, Secret Service & DoD. If government had authority over Twitter, it wudda been Eloned a few years sooner.
Love this – and find it so helpful- and so appreciate your work, your intelligence and your careful step-by-step analysis. Which doesn’t make me feel like an idiot for not understanding every angle of social media and some of its underpinnings in the first place.
Ditto what Jordan said. This Thanksgiving weekend, you are one of the many “things” I’m very grateful for.
Thanks, Teri. Looks like a new adventure navigating post Twitter. On the look out for a tech savvy friend.
Great job JJ.
Excellent, deep information here. BIG thank you for it! It may take me a few days to click on all the links! Looking forward to hearing more, best, Mike.
Thank you so much Teri! Really appreciate all the work you put into your weekly posts! You truly are making a difference.
Good overviews of both the social media propaganda mechanics and Mastadon/Post. It’s interesting the level of trust users put into what are essentially anonymous Twitter accounts, and your descriptions of how liberal rage is manufactured there is a close parallel of how good old Fox News works its magic: stoke fear, point the audience at someone to blame, and make vague outrageous accusations.
I was forced to spend enough time on user interface design to know that nothing is “intuitive”, or stated another way, any user interface is intuitive once you know how it works. Ex-Twitter users invested time in learning and using Twitter’s UI and use model, so anything not-Twitter will be unfriendly and “wrong” to them as they start by trying to use it as if it was Twitter. It’s just a fact of life, users will adapt or move elsewhere.
Thank you for this information! I had just joined a Mastodon server but really didn’t understand anything about how it was set up, and this helped.
Weirdly, right before reading your post, I had seen this:
https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/22543858/isabel-fall-attack-helicopter
Good stuff as usual. I’m not Twitter aware enough to recognize persons #1 & #2, I think I can guess the fiction writer. Yours is the first “analysis(?)” I’ve seen that Mastodon does not lend itself to monetization. Makes sense. Seems like no one can do paid advertising on Mastodon. Open question if the post.news business model will work. Odds from experience to date are against post.news being profitable.
I speculate that Musk has created instabilities in Twitter that will considerably erode its social and political position. One wonders if that was an intentional goal of Musk or his backers. I don’t think any platform is likely to replace it in a mirror like way. Post.news seems unlikely to attract anywhere near the number of users as Twitter. Maybe all this will lead to more prominence for “stand alone” web sites?
Reference Mastodon is messy, passing along: “Mastodon’s Content-Moderation Growing Pains” https://reason.com/volokh/2022/11/21/mastodons-content-moderation-growing-pains/ The money quote
“Either way, the fights will be messy and public. But [Rozenshtein] suspect{s} that Churchill’s observation about democracy is true also of content moderation on a global internet: the decentralized option may well be the worst—except for all the rest.”
For me, for now, no News.post. If important content contributors or my personal network moves there, I’ll consider it. I’m on Mastadon, https://toad.social/@DaveC if anyone is interested.
Thanks, Teri. FYI, your link to Mastodon in this sentence doesn’t work: “As an experiment, I had my in-house technical support staff (my husband) set up a Mastodon server for me. You can see it here.”
Oops. Will fix that. Thanks for letting me know.
Thank you so much for all the time and research you put into these articles and for sharing all the different types of information on our justice system and well as SM. I’m thinking I’ll take a break from SM, too, until things sort of shake out on which platform will work best for me. But I hope I will continue to get your publications via email.
Thank you – this post was very informative. It’s easy to be sucked in to engagement by rage inducing bait and takes awareness and discipline to refrain. I am learning but certainly not always successful. Your articles have been helpful. Twitter is not known for reasoned dialog based on facts or evidence; however, it is easy to use and familiar. Hopefully, the same will be said about
other site(s).
Thank you for your weekly blog, I’ve learned a lot from it. I have one question regarding a previous blog. You’re volunteering in Georgia as a lawyer during the elections, is anyone looking at the article that came out about Hershel Walker having residency in Texas and getting the homeowner’s exemption discount on his property taxes? I have property in Florida and can’t take that homeowner’s exemption there because I live in Texas and have it on my home. You know that the Republican Texas AG isn’t going to say or do anything. It’s up to us, what can I do as a Texas citizen?
I would assume so, but I have no direct knowledge. My job is limited to sitting in a “boiler room” and handling problems from polling places. Speaking of which, I’ll be on duty Monday and Tuesday, so I can ask someone if they know how that’s being handled.
It may be my device, but I didn’t see a link for your Mastodon server.
I got on the waitlist for post.news, but given I’m not a major influencer, it’s likely to be quite a while before I can see anything. Also, the for profit nature of the platform is disturbing. Free exchange of ideas and a profit motive create a conflict. From that perspective, Mastodon seems a cleaner option for real exchanges.
I just added a comment to the blog post. I’m currently transitioning from one Mastodon account to my new server. Will post the new handle when the transition is complete.
I just checked on Mastodon, and it looks like your mstdn.social account is now redirecting to your new server – law-and-politics.online, but the server isn’t accepting new users. 🙁 I’m sure I’m not the only one who would be happy to play by your rules on your server.
And while I was following you before you moved to your new server, it appears that my follow is now stuck in some kind of request phase. Odd. I guess it takes some time to port all of your existing followers over.
It is just taking time for everything to move. Andy says it’s because the server I’m leaving is slow. About opening up to new users: I talked to two people about coming in a users, but it may just be me. We’re not ready for the expense or work of opening it up.
I couldn’t find the link to your Mastodon account.
I’m moving my accounts right now. I will post it after the transition is complete.
Mastodon is a challenge… but that may be the good news.
Twitter isn’t Twitter any more. And this may be the resurgence of wordpress, twitch streaming, and substack.
Thanks for the insight on Mastodon. Very timely since I closed my Twitter account a couple of hours ago. I’m going to take a break from social media but will re-engage at some point if I can find something that doesn’t make me angry.
I saw these instructions on shutting down a Twitter account & copied them for when I shutter mine –
If you deactivate/delete your Twitter account, your @ handle will be publicly available in 30 days. The chances that you will be impersonated with no recourse is very high! Don’t do it – especially if you had a fairly popular account.
To wipe things, deactivate your account, then go to Twitter.com/login and reactivate it. All of your followers will be gone. Now lock the account and let it rot.
@semiphemeral is a great tool for wiping data, including DMs.
Thank you for this! I deactivated, and will follow ur advice! Best!
Excellent advice; thanks for sharing that. I’m still on Twitter (and I don’t have any significant presence there) but for people like Teri with a major platform, it would be great not to be impersonated!
Thank you for your thoughtful posts. I am glad that I found you, and I’m glad that I quit following the fiction writer who just got me upset.
I’m now on Post and that’s where I’ll stay now that good folks like you are there explaining things.
The genius of the Internet is that it has given a voice to people from whom we might otherwise never have heard.
The tragedy of the Internet is that it has given a voice to people from whom we might otherwise never, ever, ever have heard.
Thank you for providing thought-provoking ideas and useful information.