When social networking took off, I was quick to insist that I hated what social networking was, but I saw a lot of potential. I started discussing the logical evolution of social networking. Almost immediately, the entire industry stagnated.
We recently saw the launch of Truth Social. Truth Social was developed as a conservative alternative to Twitter. Is this the long overdue evolution of social networking? I have compared what I have seen from Twitter to what I have seen from Truth Social. Truth Social appears to be a complete knockoff with no new ideas. It's effectively Republican Twitter. A lack of contributions to the industry is one very strong reason for me to avoid the site.
We keep hearing about political polarization in America. What are the implications of having a Democrat Twitter and a Republican Twitter? Democrat Twitter users will love for their platform to becoming more of the echo chamber that they have been demanding. Truth Social is bound to become a conservative echo chamber. Dividing one social network into two echo chambers certainly won't help bring people of different viewpoints together. It will only increase the divide.
What about those of us who don't mindlessly embrace partisan conformity? As Twitter becomes more of an echo chamber, Twitter users will likely become even more intolerant of alternative viewpoints. Non-conformists will likely have some views accepted, especially on issues in which they overlap with liberals, but they will have fewer allies when they take a more conservative stance. Of course, not everything is going to match with one of two parties. I expect the same confusion of issues that already exists when someone says something outside the scope of two-party politics.
Truth Social will appeal mostly to Republican loyalist, but I expect a number of liberals to troll the website. It will be an echo chamber from the very beginning with the same problems that we can expect from Twitter as some of their conservative voices flee. Non-conformists will find hostilities towards viewpoints that match liberals in any way. They will have the same problems with views that don't align with either party.
The refusal to contribute to the industry combined with the potential to fuel partisan polarization is precisely why I don't intend to join Truth Social. If you know me, you know that I hate saying things in absolute terms (although I have slipped at times). In this particular case, I can at least see arguments to join.
There are a lot of people who see what I say and assume that I'm a Republican. Despite my rejection of partisan conformity, I can understand this viewpoint. Whenever I agree with something associated with the Democrats, someone else has already said it. I hate wasting my time writing what you can read elsewhere. By contrast, I have found a number of situations in which I have more conservative views that don't quite match what I have read elsewhere. I also openly have bigger issues with the Democrats than the Republicans.
If I joined Truth Social, my views that are closer to the Democrats would become a minority viewpoint on that platform. This would likely result in diversifying my comments for the platforms. This could potentially help people understand that I am not a Republican.
Of course, I'm not sold that convincing people that I'm not a Republican is worth supporting a knockoff that will likely fuel polarization. I'm not going to outright reject the possibility, but I currently have no plans to join.
No comments:
Post a Comment