Believe it or not, Mel Conway is active on social media. We used to follow each other on Twitter.

An interesting insight that Mel has: social networks, if left alone, trend towards unfairness.

The reason: The solutions you can find to the problems you have depend on who is talking to whom.

And the solutions we need right now require a synthesis of understandings that lie in multiple disciplines that don’t talk to each other.

This creates the conditions for unfairness.

Harry G. Frankfurt's key social media insights can be found in his book "On Bullshit".

This is highly readable!

What is bullshit? What makes it bullshit? And why is there a rise in bullshit?

He concludes that whenever new forms of communications increase, so does bullshit. And the more social this social technology is, there's higher peer pressure to participate in bullshit.

The reason: despite lack of knowledge, people on social media feel pressure to form and share opinions.

The third thinker I recommend, José Ortega y Gasset, wrote a key insight on social media 93 years ago: Revolt of the Masses

This book details why conflict happens on social media, and why this gives rise to Fascism.

He examines two participants in this conflict

1. Specialists who believe their expertise should extend to command above others
2. Mass-men contemptuous of expertise, care little for facts, and see the world in terms of winning or losing

Generally, I think three things are inevitable about all social media platforms:

1. Unfairness on social media means there will power users with privilege
2. The desire for social status results in the spread of bullshit, outrage, and misinformation
3. Especially when people feel disempowered, they see social media as a game that's about winning or losing—not as a means to create and nurture human connection

I've mentioned previously why I was against Blue Checks, why I believe this "feature" created unfairness on Twitter, and why certain migrants here are wrong for trying to push for Blue Check status on the Fediverse.

I hope that here on the Fediverse, the desire for fairness overrides the desire for status.

People in favor of creating Blue Check status on the Fediverse don't like acknowledging that it's about social status.

They claim that they're purely concerned about account verification.

But account verification already exists on the Fediverse, so why do you want a Blue Check here anyway?

Because the Fediverse's current account verification doesn't carry the same weight as a Blue Check when it comes to social status.

I point this situation out whenever people say Blue Checks have nothing to do with social status:

Richard Spencer, the white supremacist, was once a Blue Check. What's more people demanded that his Blue Check be removed—not because the Twitter account in question was an imposter. There was no doubt the account was verified, that was not up for debate.

The Blue Check was removed because Twitter wanted to revoke the social status that came with it.

The appeal is social status.

So it's apparent that Blue Check status establishes unfairness and privilege.

But another side effect is that it encourages the propensity for bullshit.

Why is this? Because for those who have Blue Check status, there's now greater pressure to state an opinion—even on matters outside their realm of knowledge.

A good example of this is Neil deGrasse Tyson. Ever read his tweets regarding history? They're bullshit!

Yet because he's a Blue Check, the bullshit carries extraneous weight.

What's more, Blue Check status creates the conditions for Fascism. I'm not exaggerating about this point.

For people who have it, Blue Check status gives them the conceit that they should have command over others.

And if you don't have Blue Check status, you become contemptuous of the Blue Check's claims of status.

Which means actively diminishing Blue Check expertise.

At this point, facts don't matter. Just winning.

Now we have a motivation for using Twitter to attain power.

It's no mistake that Twitter was Donald Trump's platform of choice—this despite Facebook being a more popular social network while he was President.

Twitter gave him status that other social networks couldn't provide.

And in turn, because Donald Trump was a Blue Check, he rode the waves of authoritarianism to the white house.

Blue Check status correlates to real world power.

Further, why was it so significant that Twitter banned Donald Trump from their service?

Once again, social status.

The ban wasn't just about a violation of the TOS—Trump did that many times without consequence. It was about diminishing his social status.

And isn't it funny how this ban finally happened after Jan 6—not before?