Very loosely, back in the 1990s, centralized mass media was seen as stifling original thinking, forcing people to conform to whatever dimwitted thing the TV fed to them.
Then in the 2000s comes social media. We can find people online who we actually like hanging out with. Like-minded people didn't have to live isolated from each other. You could be whomever you wanted to be -- identity was seen as virtual, easily-changeable -- and this was seen as good.
Nowadays, the very same centralized mass media are demonizing being able to more easily choose your friends. They portray "like-minded people" gathering online as some kind of criminal or terrorist activity that threatens to destroy society in some not well explained way. Being able to express yourself using different personas is now seen not as a creative endeavor, but the work of shady operatives trying to stay hidden as they manipulate the already-willing into doing things they already agree with.
Forgive my skepticism if you feel it's unwarranted, but all I see in this article is a concerted effort by centralized mass media to regain its influence over society, and what that gets us is what we had for most of the 20th century, and that's not good.
Then in the 2000s comes social media. We can find people online who we actually like hanging out with. Like-minded people didn't have to live isolated from each other. You could be whomever you wanted to be -- identity was seen as virtual, easily-changeable -- and this was seen as good.
Nowadays, the very same centralized mass media are demonizing being able to more easily choose your friends. They portray "like-minded people" gathering online as some kind of criminal or terrorist activity that threatens to destroy society in some not well explained way. Being able to express yourself using different personas is now seen not as a creative endeavor, but the work of shady operatives trying to stay hidden as they manipulate the already-willing into doing things they already agree with.
Forgive my skepticism if you feel it's unwarranted, but all I see in this article is a concerted effort by centralized mass media to regain its influence over society, and what that gets us is what we had for most of the 20th century, and that's not good.