Social
- Agenda Setting tells you what to think about.
- Framing tells you how to think about it.
- Priming prompts you to take an action.
-
Will Instagram users actually adopt it? This is the big question. Will the people I follow on Instagram start accounts? And will they post content that I’m interested in? What will the demographics of the user base be? So many question about what this audience might look like.
-
How will the ActivityPub implementation work? As a devoted Micro.Blog user, I’m interested in the rumored ActivityPub integration. Will I be able to follow Threads users on Micro.Blog? Can I cross post from Micro.Blog? As the first mainstream ActivityPub implementation, it will be interesting to see how they connect with the larger Fediverse.
-
What’s the media narrative? It’s guaranteed that there will be a direct contrast with the dumpster fire that Twitter has become, but what other media narratives will take shape. How will it be compared to Mastodon and Bluesky? Will media coverage increase consumer knowledge about the ActivityPub? Sounds like a research paper for grad school.
Threads as a "federated" brand solution
When the exodus from Twitter first started last year, many tech-savvy people were moving to Mastodon and I wondered if brands would move their accounts to self hosted instances. After all, from a branding standpoint, @offical@starbucks.com is better than @starbucks@mastodon.social. At the end of that post, I posited that someone would come along with a service that handled the fediverse complexity for companies.
That service is Threads.
Lots of people have asked why Meta was interested in providing ActivityPub support. I honestly think part of the story is so Meta can tell brands – their advertisers – that they can just publish on Threads and it will eventually be accessible on any other non-Twitter platform. Of course, they’ve still got to deliver on that promise… right now Threads doesn’t have ActivityPub support.
So far, branded accounts have flocked to Threads. If @BRAND-NAME@threads.com becomes the default for official branded social content, Meta benefits. I still think companies would be better off owning their instance with a branded domain, and maybe we will get there some day, but for now, it looks like Threads is where the brands are headed.
(I think that eventually, Meta will offer an upgraded “brand tier” that allows companies to use their own domain instead of @threads.com. for a substanial fee, of course.)
Bob Wertz is a creative director, type designer, Ph.D. student and researcher living in Columbia, South Carolina.
Twitterless: The Final Chapter
I’ve been preparing for Twitter’s demise for seven years, but I didn’t see ‘X’ coming.
I’ve been preparing for the end of Twitter since 2016, when Twitter was struggling with some financial issues and the future was uncertain. I pondered what would happen of Twitter went away suddenly.
Which got me thinking, what if we woke up one morning and Twitter was gone. Or more likely, what if Twitter changed so radically, that it was unusable?
I’m more concerned that Twitter, or a company that buys Twitter, will change it so completely, that it becomes useless.
Fast forward a little over a year later. Twitter’s financial issues were less dire, but they were struggling with flat user growth, coupled with a rise in abuse and hate on the platform.
As Twitter tries to jumpstart the service, I still believe the likelihood of Twitter imploding within the next few years is high.
When Elon Musk bought Twitter, I assumed he’d shake things up, but I was concerned about the direction he would take Twitter in. I wrote a third Twitterless post to recap the changes that I’d made to deal with the hypothetical demise of Twitter.
If Twitter ceases to be enjoyable, I’ll leave. To be honest, I’ll miss it. I joined in 2008 and 14 years is a long time to use any service. It’s part of my daily routine. At the end of the day, though, if a service isn’t making my life better, I’m better off without it.
Once Twitter abruptly cut off third party clients, my Twitter usage dropped dramatically. I was a Twitteriffic user for over a decade, and it was obvious from the way he handled that situation that Elon Musk’s Twitter wasn’t going to be what I wanted. I moved on.2
Now, he’s changing the name of Twitter to X. I always assumed that someone would buy Twitter for the brand equity and change the service to make it more profitable. Instead, Musk changed the service and destroyed an iconic brand, all while making it less profitable.
I am going to miss Twitter. I’ve mostly enjoyed it over the years. I care enough about my own tweet history, that earlier this year, when Manton offered a way to import all of my Twitter history, I moved 15 years worth of tweets into a searchable database hosted here on Micro.Blog. I don’t know what I’ll use it for, but I do like having it.
I feel like I’ve prepared adequately for the Twitter apocalypse, but there is one area in particular where the loss of Twitter will still hurt. A common thread through all three Twitterless posts was a lament that there aren’t other services optimized for following breaking news or live events. This is still true. Maybe Threads,3 Bluesky or Mastodon can step in, but until then, I’ll miss Twitter most when watching a sporting event, an Apple keynote or following a local news story. For the last few months, I’ve been viewing Twitter to check in during big events, but the time has come to move on.
Twitter is finally dead.
Bob Wertz is a creative director, type designer, Ph.D. student and researcher living in Columbia, South Carolina.
We’ve always had independent media. Why should social media be any different?
New social media outlets prove the viability of indie social.
The invention of the printing press made mass media possible. Printing houses produced popular books and bibles, but they also spread the writing that powered the Reformation. Major newspapers became was the dominant media for decades, but there have always been community and independent newspapers. Self-publishing, indie music, art house films and college radio are all forms of independent media.
Economy of scale1 pushes these systems toward consolidation. But as these media outlets consolidate into a few major players, there is always a market for an alternative. Why should social media be any different?
When the internet became popular, personal sites and blogs were the ultimate form of independent media. Economy of scale kicked in like it always does. Large news sites dominate and Google Search drives the traffic to the largest most well established sites.2 Blogs became less popular, but there are still many independent blogs and personal sites around the internet.
With social media, consolidation drove us to a handful of sites. Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, TikTok and Snapchat. The funding model drove this as well… Venture capital investment bet on the next big social media winner, and sites either made it big, or disappeared. (RIP: Path, Vine, Periscope, Gowalla, Google+, Google Wave.) I wasn’t sure there was space for independent social media.
All of the attention right now is on Meta’s Threads and the cage match with Twitter, but there’s a lot more going on in the space. Elon’s purchase and erosion of Twitter3 has opened the doors to alternatives. ActivityPub is starting to take root that will allow some interoperability between sites. I’ve been a Micro.Blog subscriber for years and it’s a wonderful independent social space.4 Mastodon and Bluesky are both putting forward their visions for an open web. And users are adapting Discord and other sites to create smaller, independent communities.
These sites now have a large enough user base to stick around, and technical solutions like ActivityPub allow easy access to creators on other networks. The businesses aren’t (currently) poisoned by the venture capital desire to grow fast and get rich. This is how a healthy independent social media ecosystem develops.
Bob Wertz is a creative director, type designer, Ph.D. student and researcher living in Columbia, South Carolina.
The Instagram Threads launch and media effects theory
Yesterday, I mentioned I was interested in the media narrative surrounding the introduction of Instagram Threads. I wanted to expand on what I’m looking for, and to do that, I need to start with some mass communications theory.
I’m a Ph.D. student that mostly researches visual effects, but I’ve taken a few classes that look at how media effects work. There are levels to media effects, but essentially, you can break it into three types of effects.1
Everyone teaches this a little differently, but this is how I like to think about it. As I look at how the media covers Instagram’s Thread, I think it’s worth thinking about the coverage in these terms.
Agenda Setting
The media is very good and setting the “agenda” for what people are thinking about. If the media you watch or read is covering a topic, you are more likely to care about the topic.
We know that the tech media like The Verge have picked up the thread and predictably, tech circles online are discussing what Instagram Threads will mean for social media and the Fediverse. This is agenda setting in action.
But will the mass media cover it? Will the CNN website run a story about Instagram Threads? Will The NY Times run an explainer about how to use Threads? Will South-Carolina-native and all-around good guy Craig Melvin talk about Threads on the Today Show? I don’t know.
While “agenda setting” sounds a little nefarious, it isn’t always. There are many factors that go into story selection. One major challenge right now is the crowded media environment. Take a look at the front pages of major news websites and what do you see? Supreme Court rulings. Mass shootings. Russia’s mutiny. Ukraine’s counteroffensive. Trump’s indictments. Protests in France. The U.S. relationship with China. Interest rates. Inflation. These topics all compete for space and time in a news organization. Does the introduction of a new service from Meta really rank up there in importance with these other topics?
News media also pay attention to metrics about their readership. If viewers are reading stories about Threads, editors will assign more stories. If people aren’t interested in the topic, it will fade. There seems to be general interest in the Elon Musk’s mismanagement of Twitter and his rivalry with Mark Zuckerberg. If people are reading the stories about Threads, maybe Meta does get a little more coverage than something like this would normally merit.2
Honestly, I’ll know if there is mass media coverage when my wife asks me what I think about it.
Framing
The next level relates to how the stories are positioned. We know that tech media is framing the release of Instagram Threads as the latest change in a rapidly changing social media world. The stories right now seem to be largely framed as a contrast with existing Twitter alternatives, especially given the conversations within Mastodon admins about whether to preemptively block access to a service that may support ActivityPub.
But for a mass media audience, that’s all too nuanced. Given the high profile implosion of Twitter, and the bravado between Musk and Zuckerberg, I think pretty much every story is going to frame Instagram Threads as a Twitter-killer. I do imagine that they’ll at least mention Mastodon and Bluesky. Beyond that, who knows.
Priming
If the mass media covers the introduction of Threads – and the framing is positive – the coverage may be enough to prompt people to sign up for accounts. This priming effect is typically short-lived, but if Meta is able to get a lot of news coverage, there may be a surge in sign ups not too dissimilar to the surge in interest surrounding Mastodon and Bluesky. This won’t necessarily translate into engaged customers, but getting people to download the app and try the service is the first hurdle for Meta.
So as you look at the media coverage surrounding the launch of Instagram Threads, think about it in terms of agenda setting, framing and priming. (And actually, as you look at media bias in general, these three concepts are helpful in understanding how it works and why it happens.)
Bob Wertz is a creative director, type designer, Ph.D. student and researcher living in Columbia, South Carolina.
Three questions ahead of the release of Instagram's Threads
I looks like Meta will release their text-based, Instagram-branded Twitter competitor this week. Am I excited about Instagram Threads? Not really. I’m happy with the current state of my social media usage.
Am I curious about it? Absolutely. We are in a fascinating period of change in the services we use online and the ways we share information. Specifically, I’m interested in three questions:
I’ll probably sign up for an account, since Instagram is pretty much the only social media I use other than Micro.Blog. And we’ll see what happens.
Bob Wertz is a creative director, type designer, Ph.D. student and researcher living in Columbia, South Carolina.
Brands: Federated
Self-hosted social
There’s lots of hype about Mastodon as people flee Twitter, but lately, I’ve been thinking about how brands will function on federated social sites.
If the big brands in the world are going to give Mastodon a shot, they aren’t going to just join an existing instance… they’ll host their own server for all of their related accounts. Let’s say you are a large international brand like Starbucks. Are you going to use @starbucks@mastodon.social? Not when you can have @official@starbucks.com, @news@starbucks.com, and @customercare@starbucks.com. If you run your own instance, you never have to worry about someone grabbing a handle you wanted to use. No worries about the content moderation policy on the instance you’ve selected. And because of the way ActivityPub works, your posts will be visible across Mastodon and other compatible services. As a bonus, it’s much harder for a fraudulent account to spoof you if you connect your federated social account to your primary domain name.
(In reality, someone will create a service to manage this for brands and charge big money for it, because there is no way a corporate IT department is going to accept the risk of running a Mastodon instance.)
The balance between broadcast and engagement
Content is more important than commentary.
When the internet was becoming popular, I remember being told that traditional media was just broadcasting. The internet promised more than just broadcasting, it offered “engagement.”
Don’t let people fool you. Engagement happened before the internet. People read the newspaper and talked about stories with their family and friends. They watched the evening news and discussed it at the water cooler at work the next day. They wrote letters to the editor to express their agreement or disapproval. They called radio shows to ask questions. They bought classified ads to share a job listing or sell a car. People engaged with media before the internet.
Instead, what the internet offered was an instant, two-way feedback loop between publisher and audience. Comments on blogs and news sites led the way. Then, social media provided the ultimate in real time engagement with metrics that let you track everything.
Instant response. Maximum engagement. Integrated with the content.
And how has that worked out? Thoughtful comments on blogs were quickly drowned out with spam. News sites were filled with reactionary opinions. Social media offered both reactionary opinions and spam and as a bonus channeled hate and harassment. Managing commentary takes as much staff and resources as creating the content, but people love providing their opinion and arguing their point of view, which drives traffic. And that traffic was the most important thing to the companies like Facebook and Twitter that sell the advertising that surrounds the hate.
As Twitter implodes and some people look for what’s next, I think we need to reexamine the relationship between publishing and engagement. Creation and commentary. True engagement is what follows when we create high-quality, beneficial content. We need to restore a focus on publishing the content, not just on the commentary. And our new technologies need to support that balance.
P.S. One of the things I like about Micro.Blog is the absence of metrics. No follower counts. No likes. No retweets. If you are used to obsessively checking how many likes your last post got, the absence of metrics takes a little getting used to, but it resets the balance between publishing and engagement.
P.S.S. It occurs to me that the most profitable company in the world, Apple, creates a lot of content without maintaining a traditional social media presence.
Live events and social media
One thing that Twitter excels at — which will be difficult to replace — is commentary during live events. Last night, I was able to follow a range of commentary on several college football games and the World Series all from my Twitter feed.
It’s not just who I follow, it’s also the way the service is constructed. When following a bunch of live events, you need to use the non-algorithmic timeline. Twitter still, begrudgingly, allows for that. Facebook has many of the people I follow on Twitter, but the comments are jumbled, appearing whenever the algorithm decides, often incoherently out of order. And I can’t see following my South Carolina Gamecocks on another large service, like Linked In. 🤣
Perhaps the real question is if I need the stream of commentary at all? I get value out of live commentary from sports journalists and other fans. I feel like it ads to my enjoyment, but I enjoyed watching games before Twitter existed. Maybe live events is one of those areas where I need to reexamine my reliance on social media.