[claudiawerner]

This is a great point; I've noticed the lack of regard for the qualitative difference between print media and social media for a while now - whenever somebody will raise a point about social media, it is almost immediately pointed out in a reply that before social media there was print media, as if the difference between them is abolished by the mere comparison. XKCD has unfortunately done this too[0]. There are several differences between new media and old media which have very real effects:

* The quantity

* Ease of access to more marginal opinions

* "Dark patterns" such as infinite scrolling

* Internet "debates" traded in 140 or 280-character blows, to be endlessly liked and retweeted

* Anybody, anywhere can make a good-sounding point which is still logically flawed

* Centralization, not of opinions but of specific publishing platforms that have the final say in the control of content, despite being practically public spaces[1]

[0] https://xkcd.com/1601/

[1] While it's true that newspapers and publishers had a lot of control over public opinion, Twitter has more control over public opinion than any newspaper in history.