>Then there's the hypocrisy of the reader, who enjoys the thrills articles like those give, but also enjoys the service too much to stop, and leave the system of exploitation. Like, “It's so awful, so awful, but I need my daily dose of filtered cat pictures, so you're gonna get that sad dickpick spam in my stead. It's just the world we live in! The algorithm makes me continue doing that!”, etc.
I get you're angry but if everyone who complains about how awful social media can be while they themselves participate in social media are hypocrites and therefore shouldn't speak up (because... ???), how do you honestly see society being able to address the problem?
Heck even now, both you and I are participating in a limited form of social media, aren't we to hypocrites for complaining about the harm given your interpretation? I mean sure we aren't looking at "filtered cat pictures" (or maybe we are :P) but I don't see how what we're doing here is fundamentally different.
I get you're angry but if everyone who complains about how awful social media can be while they themselves participate in social media are hypocrites and therefore shouldn't speak up (because... ???), how do you honestly see society being able to address the problem?
Heck even now, both you and I are participating in a limited form of social media, aren't we to hypocrites for complaining about the harm given your interpretation? I mean sure we aren't looking at "filtered cat pictures" (or maybe we are :P) but I don't see how what we're doing here is fundamentally different.