I think this is spot on and it's why I see a real shift off of social media coming on a societal level, when you can't tell what's real and what's fake.. log off and go out into the real world.
I am hopeful this will be the case. But I also don't understand how people can spend so much time/energy on social media right now, so I might be wishcasting. The world would be a much better place if social media vanished.
Yes, but this is an unavoidable consequence of the average person having access to a breadth and depth of information which was unfathomable 50 years ago. The bad to the good in technology.
It’s a bit of a “black pill” but something like 85% don’t have the ability to function in this kind of information environment-and a sizable portion of those people are convinced that they do.
That post talking about your old Nike take as if new is infused with a self-assurance that is almost comical in light of the botched citation. Fwiw, I knew this Substack would be a success when you published that piece because it was great and (more importantly) I loved getting it narrated. Many do it now; few did it then.
One thing that allows this collapse is a plateauing of video recording. I can instantly tell if a video (or film stock) is before, say, 2005. After that? Could be anywhere in a 20 year range.
Add to that what’s already been remarked upon many times: Fashions and culture seem to be in a stasis, so other cues are also muddled.
You can hardly blame the throngs of women defending Lindsay Clancy given Sean Connery's recent comments
I think this is spot on and it's why I see a real shift off of social media coming on a societal level, when you can't tell what's real and what's fake.. log off and go out into the real world.
I am hopeful this will be the case. But I also don't understand how people can spend so much time/energy on social media right now, so I might be wishcasting. The world would be a much better place if social media vanished.
Yes, but this is an unavoidable consequence of the average person having access to a breadth and depth of information which was unfathomable 50 years ago. The bad to the good in technology.
It’s a bit of a “black pill” but something like 85% don’t have the ability to function in this kind of information environment-and a sizable portion of those people are convinced that they do.
Think you are being generous with the 85%, but overall I agree.
Social media needs a watermark for clips showing the timestamp just like news sites show “This article is 4 years old” on older stories.
Paging Dr. Manhattan
That post talking about your old Nike take as if new is infused with a self-assurance that is almost comical in light of the botched citation. Fwiw, I knew this Substack would be a success when you published that piece because it was great and (more importantly) I loved getting it narrated. Many do it now; few did it then.
One thing that allows this collapse is a plateauing of video recording. I can instantly tell if a video (or film stock) is before, say, 2005. After that? Could be anywhere in a 20 year range.
Add to that what’s already been remarked upon many times: Fashions and culture seem to be in a stasis, so other cues are also muddled.
Keane on HOS? Make it happen. Find the clip of him complaining his hotel couldnt make him poached eggs