[ahmedfromtunis]

I don't use TikTok but spend some time on Instagram. Despite the format, I enjoy a lot of intellectually stimulating content (and, sometimes, conversations) on the platform.

Sometimes a friend would show me their feed and I'd be shocked at how different the content they are presented by their version of the algorithm.

There are a lot of people putting a lot of effort to create very interesting content and we should not belittle their work just to fein intellectual superiority.

There's really nothing inherently wrong about the format.

[thundergolfer]

> There's really nothing inherently wrong about the format.

"Our conventional response to all media, namely that it is how they are used that counts, is the numb stance of the technological idiot. For the 'content' of a medium is like the juicy piece of meat carried by the burglar to distract the watchdog of the mind...The effects of technology do not occur at the level of opinions or concepts, but alter sense ratios or patterns of perception steadily and without any resistance. The serious artist is the only person able to encounter technology with impunity, just because he is an expert aware of the changes in sense perception." — Marshal McLuhan, Understanding Media

[eleventen]

I feel like McLuhan is so thoroughly accepted as gospel now that it’s refreshing to see someone casually dismiss the idea out of hand like OC. I would love to see a serious exploration of the argument against McLuhan in 2025, just for fun.

[raddan]

You mean aside from the fact that his quasi-mystical, self-important proclamations have no factual basis? I personally dislike how his ideas cast a cynical veneer over truly transformative changes without actually contributing anything useful to the conversation.

Who takes this stuff as gospel? Academics who study critical theory?

[thundergolfer]

McLuhan is anything but a cynic. It sounds like you haven’t read him.

[JSR_FDED]

I suspect he got right more than he got wrong.

Who is OC?

[wffurr]

"Original Commenter"

I have not seen that particular jargon before but it rhymes with OP (Original Poster) that I was able to figure it out from context.

[AuthAuth]

There is 100% some egotistic intellectual superiority as someone who consumes long form written content and long form video content. But its hard not to look down on short form video as a format and the culture of the medium. It seems clear to me that shorter form content is forced to "simplify" topics and sweeten narratives to retain the viewers attention. I've seen a ton of short form videos where I came away thinking wow what a great little video i really feel like i've learnt something. But then I double check to see if its actually true and its simplified to the point of being misleading. My sister shows me these videos all the time and its misleading or completely untrue majority of the time.

[vidyesh]

I don't think the article wants to belittle their work. The format isn't wrong, but the way the content is structured is troubling; it is to cater to the algorithm by tapping into the parts of our brain that are not meant to be stimulated all the time.

Any form of media isn't bad as long as it's analytical, i.e., one that forces you not just to be an observer all the time. Most content on such platforms is designed to keep your brain constantly stimulated so you never shift your attention to think. The stimulation and the dopamine hits just keep you hooked to it. They give little time for contemplation, encouraging passive consumption.

When consuming long‑form content in any format, you get bored or drift just enough to think your own thoughts as you consume. But when consuming short‑form content, you are forced not to think unless you choose to pause; if you get distracted, you might think you missed something, which you don't want to do.

Information‑dense content is not good in any way, whether academic or entertainment. It doesn't leave you with any time to think on your own, discuss with yourself or the creator, dismiss some faulty thoughts, and eventually form an opinion of your own that you want to discuss with someone, somewhere.

That being said, not everything has to be long form content. Short content can provide concise information where needed, also serve as a gateway to deeper exploration, if the viewer follows up. I am not sure how that can be encouraged as most do not choose to do, as they are drowned with it and never get time to explore deeper into topics they want to.