20 years ago we understood computers & internet pretty well, and basic social science hasn't changed much since then. Yet we mostly failed to predict the rise of social media. So what exactly did we get wrong then; what exactly have we learned the we didn't know then?
Conversation
Replying to
Umm 20 years ago was 1998 and we *had* social media. Forums, Usenet, IRC, geocities, various messengers, early multiplayer games, pre-blog ezines with active comments, precursor to slashdot... many current patterns were well already known in those media. Many saw it coming.
3
1
32
Exactly! The problem with organic OG social media was that there was no "there" there. Real water becomes invisible to us fishes.
New Social Media platforms are fish farms. There is very much a There there, and it uses the lure of virality as a lottery for faux social credit.
2
4
This is simply not true. I was there, including working for a social media company 2000-01. There was very much a there there with a meta discourse like today and awareness. It was not water to fishes.
Depends on what we want to call "OG social media". I think that awareness was very unevenly distributed. Many were happy to just enjoy the environment of the Well & Fidonet & Slashdot. (Of course some were talking about meta of "where does this lead us".)
1
There were some who experienced the medium as just a medium. There was a lot of fun and newness to it because of the p2p aspect -- similar to excitement about early FM radio or cable TV rejecting broadcast content monopolies.
By early 2000s, I think awareness dawned on many ppl.


