Yes, you read that right.
I believe we just witnessed the peak in centralized social media. This is something that is hard for most to believe since it appears that these firms are so entrenched. However, history shows that it is a situation that keeps repeating itself.
Not too long ago, there was a video rental store on seemingly every corner. A short time before that, most shopping centers had a Fotomat where people had their film developed. Of course, this was replaced by the fact that everyone took pictures on digital cameras, a market dominated by Japanese companies. Today, the most commonly used cameras are on phones.
The point is that things can change very quickly. It is not uncommon for something to go from mass use to outcast in 5 years. We could be seeing the path being exhibited by centralized social media.
To start, we must admit that the task being laid upon these companies is impossible. While it is easy to point out their bias, which would be correct, they are also having to "police" all that is posted to meet the requirements of different countries and cultures around the world.
Thus they are present with three options:
It is obvious that they chose the third option, which could be the worst of all of them.
Jack Dorsey and Twitter got blasted for censoring Trump and taking down some of his Tweets. In turn, Mark Zuckerberg left some of Trump's posts up on Facebook, a move which got him blasted.
Essentially, it is a no win situation for them.
Of course, we will refrain from crying a river for these companies. They were the entities that introduced us to surveillance capitalism. It was them who turned individuals into cattle, objects to be used for the platform's financial gain. The ability to track and monitor was taken to all time high, developed by these same companies. We still are unclear how much of this data is finding its way into the hands of governments (tyrannies) that seek to do harm.
The latest episode with Twitter getting hacked shows how vulnerable these entities truly are. Facebook was already facing a large backlash from its advertisers. Boycotts were taking place all over the place from companies upset with the policies of the Zuck led organization.
We see the policies of these platforms override most other laws and tenets held by society. As private entities, it is within their rights to establish their systems as they wish. However, many are questioning, with so much power, should they be allowed to.
Twitter is now coming under scrutiny and being called to the carpet for its lax security. Even if it is the best in the world, it still shows the flaws of centralized systems.
Last week, name people were hacked and fake messages about Bitcoin were sent out. While it is a crime, on the scale of things, this was pretty minor. Yes, there were people who lost Bitcoin yet, it must be remembered, they willingly gave it away. The victims were the Twitter accounts hacked, not the ones who were stupid and greedy enough to send Bitcoin based upon an idiotic Tweet.
What would have happened, for instance, if instead of a Bitcoin con, there were some harsher messages sent out? Imagine if the account of Trump or Biden was hacked and a Tweet was sent out that he was going to bomb Iran. What would happen if an account of a CEO was used to send out racial propaganda? Just consider the implications on that company and its stock when the market opened up.
Even after the hacks are acknowledged, the damage is done. Many believe that all future wars will start out as cyberwars. Propaganda and miscommunication was always used to validate warfare. In the digital age, it is no different. Centralized social media systems show how vulnerable accounts are. In the age of information, taking control of a powerful account, even for a few moments, can have dire implications.
As bad as all this is, it is not even the worst part about these organizations. Many call them evil since their basic essence is to divide everyone.
For whatever reason, humans thrive on drama. It is something that draws out attention. Negativity is what we often focus upon. The evening news is filled with stories that are negative because that is what gets viewers. A newscast that stated how wonderful everything is would get poor ratings. The news outlets are well aware of this.
Social media takes this to a new level. These entities intentionally foster division and conflict. Their goal is to keep people logged in and engaged. Drama is the tool that is used to do that.
Thus, it is easy to see how polarized society has become. They established what is "politically correct" and now pit those who are PC versus those who are not. When things get bad enough, they censor a few accounts. Naturally, they do not want to totally silence one side because opposition is required.
Unfortunately, this has implications far beyond people's online behavior. The power these companies wield is enormous. As we see, they are ill-equipped to handle it.
The Twitter hack is showing that these entities cannot even answer one simply question: can you guarantee my account is safe?
Every individual should be asking this question. It is easy to see that a major public personality would be hacked when tweeting a Bitcoin scam. However, what if hundreds of accounts of average citizens were hacked and suddenly misrepresented messages were posted. Would all their friends believe they were hacked? How about when they applied for a job and that information was still out there?
Centralized social media is becoming a very dangerous place. Many question the Chinese social credit system yet do not realize that online social activity is already being used against people.
For this reason, the trend is going to shift. All this publicity is going to keep growing and having an impact on these companies. We are very close to seeing the peak of centralized social media.
There is simply too much that can go wrong with them.
If you found this article informative, please give an upvote and rehive.
gif by 
