One of the most fascinating dynamics of this pandemic is the Twitter/media/pundit feedback cycle. (This was documented before for other topics, too.) Now, with many top scientists not as active, if at all, on Twitter—pandemic keeps them busy—it’s gotten even more interesting.
-
-
But it’s a feedback cycle! Media people quote the most accessible people who are sometimes, in fact, a group, which then gets represented as what we know and then the busy scientists not on here may decide that’s not a hill to die on—or not even notice. They’re not even asked.
Show this thread -
Finally lots of people have stopped commenting here at all because it’s so unpleasant. Pile-ons, accusations... I think retrospectively we are going to find all this is why so many things are so confusing on the surface. More so then the reality. Twitter isn’t a good source.
Show this thread -
Let me add this here. I’m not talking about a “good or bad” framing, but pointing out a feedback cycle that’s been documented before and one that gets stronger with time (exactly because of the feedback nature). It can exist along with the obvious other dynamics we can see.https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1396529721538748418 …
Show this thread -
And yep, this also true. In fact, I’m struck by how similar this is to what many social movements experienced: spectacularly useful early on exactly like that, but, over time, other dynamics make it harder to get that value out of it as the other feedback cycle tightens.https://twitter.com/Busabx/status/1396468797582712843 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.