Have you ever heard about something and went on X to find more details?
What is your experience when you do that?
I do not have what one would consider a “functional X account” but I do still access the app from time to time.
The scenario above is simply what I do occasionally and my experience can be summed up in one word: chaotic.
How so?
It's no news that X now pays users revenue share, what this single act does is that it pulls in modern day creators who are not after providing value but simply farming it out of the system.
So, when something happens and becomes a “trending tag” the pool of creators will spam tag every shit they post on attempts to attain impressions.
I've had to waste my time scrolling through several nonsense to find the right content.
Is that something that would kill the media?
Let's assume I chose to go on Google news instead of twitter, surely I may have to scroll through a couple of “unrelated news” to find what I'm looking for - depending on its level of popularity.
But the second I find it, that's it. I get my answers and can be on my way. I could, alternatively, have decided to go straight to Google search, put the keywords and would get my answers faster.
Surely, the media has its own flaws of bending stories, populating ads on pages and the list goes on.
But you know what it solves? The spam and trash content on social platforms like Twitter. If not for “content algorithms” you would get to see how totally trashy these spaces can be.
That said, given that twitter is a centralized platform, people will opt to put less valuable content on there, leading to more private websites(e.g the media) hosting most of the good stuff.
You can talk about community notes improving the validity of stories all you want, it's still not going to change the fact that this is two separate industries and one cannot win it all.
That said, if you make an argument of AI killing the media, you fail to realize that it is actually dependent on it, by a large margin, thus will sort ways to work with them.
And web3?
This is really the funniest one.
I'm not sure I've ever been of the opinion of web3 being a media killer because it's now quite obvious that it is not.
Like many problems facing crypto, blockchain and web3, we are once again misrepresenting innovations and putting them up in debates of killing an industry it most definitely won't.
Web3 has absolutely nothing to do with media if you look closely. Web3 is a “concept” on how extensive “blockchain” can be leveraged to revolutionize how data is stored and managed on the web.
How is that supposed to end “the media”?
It just doesn't make sense to be putting “technology” up against a mere “service”.
The media may or may not opt to use web3 technology to store and manage their data, what happens will be determined of course by what's “best for business”.
The media is not going anywhere in my assessment, it will still be of high value because the absence of it, in a way, leads to vast centralization of information and effectively, censorship, things web3 is supposedly designed to eradicate.
Posted Using InLeo Alpha
Web3 is just the rails or vehicle to transport information as web2 is except ppl "own" there data, shitposting will remain and prevail, I have an X account but rarely interact, I just add a couple of info accounts, no friends, no crypto related or shitposters, everything else is chaos as you mention
Well said. The media is a service that can benefit from any iteration of technology. It's more likely that the media will adopt the technologies and corrupt them.