this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2025
714 points (96.9% liked)
memes
22910 readers
1902 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
All you're doing now is adding a modifier to suit your needs, shaping it into the definition of social media. By your logic, any website that hosts media and allows correspondence qualifies as social media. The fact that content is created by journalists (or who ever) rather than the public makes no difference under this definition.
Take ESPN.com, for example—it's not comparable to platforms like Facebook or Reddit. Yet, it hosts media and provides a slight ability to correspond. Does that make it social media? Similarly, people watching a news broadcast on cable television and then discussing it over the phone wouldn’t turn cable TV into social media, even though discussion occurs. It’s simply not defined that way.
My contention is this: a website having media and a comment section doesn’t automatically qualify it as social media. Whether it operates as a public or private forum is irrelevant.
As for my point about anonymity, it’s a critical distinction between this platform and others like Facebook and Instagram. That distinction is relevant because it highlights a key difference in how these platforms function.
More importantly, I am making a personal statement: I do not consider Lemmy or Reddit to be social media. I understand they are categorized as such, but I am stating my disagreement with that classification.
Christ on a stick. What a bunch of inane self important dribble. I bet you like to fart in a wine glass and smell it.
I have stated my points clearly. The fact that media and correspondence is posted in a public or private fasion is irrelevant.
This platform and others like it are not used as classically considered social media like Facebook point blank period. The function of this platform compared to other social media platforms is not the same it is so drastically different that it should not be categorized as social media. If anything these kinds of platforms are media aggregators or as I like to call them news aggregators. Regardless of your opinions on it and anonymity does play a role here.
The definition of social media is too vague and encompasses too many kinds of websites to be considered useful.
I'm not stating my opinion I'm challenging the fact that platforms like this are considered social media and I'm stating facts as to why that is. So far the only thing you've managed to do is "I'm very smart this is what social media is defined as".
You haven't actually countered any of my points in any way shape or form.
But you are concerned about the two other people that are going to read this common thread before it gets deleted fantastic. Good on you for thinking of the Everyman.
Lol. The smug is strong with this one.