"Social media was a mistake and the creators should be tried for crimes against humanity"

Anon, 4chan

I always find this stance on 4chan amusing since 4chan is also social media. Just anonymous social media.

In my mind, that anonymity is what makes 4chan _not_ "social media" -- the "social" aspect is eliminated. When nobody is identifiable, the conversation necessarily becomes an exchange solely upon the content of the posts [1], not about the people posting. This distinguishes it from sites like Facebook and Twitter where identity is central to the discussion no matter how you try to ignore it and also from pseudonymous sites like Reddit and traditional forums where a person doesn't necessarily have a "real" identity tied to their post but does have an established identity, where other posters can see and bring up somebody's posting history. On a truly anonymous platform like 4chan, the only thing you can possibly know about the people you're talking to is what they've said in that one thread -- all other aspects of their identity are unavailable and irrelevant.

[1] (and, unfortunately, projections and inferences and ad-hominems...)

something can't be anonymous and social at the same time, social engagement requires personal contact and identity. And that's also what's relevant for depression on social media. A mismatch between personal identity and perceived identity on those websites is what can create skewed self-perception.

On anonymous sites you may get into a generic argument, but you don't lose reputation, you're not personally attacked in your identity, and you can't be ostracised.

>something can't be anonymous and social at the same time, social engagement requires personal contact and identity.

I don't really agree with that. Going to a bar or a club is absolutely social. And can absolutely be anonymous.

Granted, that does include personal contact, but there's no requirement to identify yourself, or if you do, provide accurate information.

I'd say the same is true for online interaction. When you interact with others (such as me responding to your comment) that's a social interaction.

Whether it's a meaningful or useful social interaction is a different question, but definitely social interactions, IMHO.

>On anonymous sites you may get into a generic argument, but you don't lose reputation, you're not personally attacked in your identity, and you can't be ostracised.

That's absolutely true. At the same time, it doesn't make those interactions not "social interactions," just anonymous or pseudonymous ones.

Just like the ones you might have on a subway or in the checkout line at a supermarket.

It does really look like sarcasrm to me.

And pushes down a point in that, if social media is so bad, why are we here?

Social media is an amazing development, and fundamental to healthy future human societies.

HN is social media.

Algorithmic marketing platforms that use AI to drive engagement in service of selling attention?

There is nothing social about them.