José María Mateos wrote:
Deepa Mohan wrote:
Welcome, Jose! That was an interesting comment of yours about mailing
lists... would like to hear a little more.
Just something I've experienced first hand. Mailing list discussions
tend to be more nuanced and carried in more good faith that a lot of
social network dumpster fires out there, where it seems like disruption
is the way to go. I think there are several causes for that, but the
facts that mailing lists have typically small memberships and, for a lot
of people, are cumbersome to manage and require some effort to join, I
think that nudges the subscribers to take more care of them.
I have to concur, and I think there are design issues that lead to this.
Social networking sites, from the notorious Facebook (which I've almost
given up on) to smaller, more specialized sites, tend to provide only a
small box in which to respond. While most can be made to carry long
messages, the format of both the input and the display (where even
modest messages are truncated) argue that the best approach is the
finely crafted bon mot -- more easily done as satire or insult -- than
the thoughtful essay of arbitrary length.
This isn't limited to conventional, online, social media sites. The
mainstream news, from cable TV to newspapers, has drifted to shorter and
shorter items, repeating them over and over, as a means of cutting
through the noise in the system. (And perhaps inspiring the current
idiot President of the US.)
But for those of us who actually *like* thinking, there is no noise, as
we work hard to find ways to isolate ourselves so as to better focus.
For folks like us (and yes, I'm sure I'm oversimplifying here) clarity
of thought, both our own and the expressions of others, far outweighs
the sheer volume of mass media, which begs us to turn off our brains and
simply marinate in the opinions of others.
Could one design a social media site that counters this trend? Yes, but
with email list still a very serviceable tool, one fails to see much need.
Could one produce news for a mass market with longer, more thoughtful
pieces? Perhaps, but the question is if one could do so profitably. Even
such venerable institutions as 60 Minutes, with it's 20-minute pieces,
tends more toward "look at this" than "what should we think of this".
One is not optimistic.
I just finished a second viewing of the film "RBG" about Ruth Bader
Ginsberg (an upgrade of an earlier version titled "The Notorious RBG",
which I think was better, if less polished). I recommend seeing this
biofilm rather than the Hollywood production that comes out later this
year. The latter appears to be reasonably accurate, but glamorized
account of her life, that could not be improved by such.
Speaking of "coming out", when I heard the Indian Supreme Court had
revoked an ancient law against homosexual behavior, it was this
Associate Justice of the US Supreme Court that came immediately to mind,
and her lifelong defense of "equality under the law". Something this
country still needs to work on.
And thus I demonstrate your point with a post that easily exceeds in
length the four or five longest posts I ever made to Facebook.
Cheers,
/ Bruce /
