The internet didn’t kill counterculture – you just won’t find it on Instagram
I think this is the biggest takeaway for me:<p>&gt; We saw this dynamic metastasize in the wake of George Floyd’s murder, when well-intentioned claims of “silence is violence” (recalling the powerful 1987 ACT-UP “Silence = Death” campaign) spiraled into calling out individuals with even a small following who hadn’t come forward with a timely public statement of solidarity or remorse. Yet public posts were subject to popular scrutiny and judged based on sincerity, originality, and tone. Not surprisingly, many people defaulted to posting a somber plain black square. But this generated criticism of its own by clogging the feed with an informational blackout during a moment when community resource sharing was critically important. Amid a chaotic time, the platform functioned exactly as designed: amplification of emotions, uptick in user interaction, growth in platform engagement and data cultivation. Cha-ching, the platform cashes in.<p>In other words, any large movement or discussion on &quot;clearnet&quot; spaces gets subverted by the algorithms and profit motive of the platform they live on.<p>However, where I disagree with the author is considering mainstream &quot;dark forest&quot; platforms like reddit or 4chan to be countercultural. In fact, I&#x27;d argue that mainstream social media can <i>never</i> be countercultural. While there may be no &quot;algorithm&quot; controlling the narrative you see on 4chan (or a straightforward and ostensibly fair one on a site like reddit), the content you see (and by extension, the narrative) is shaped by profit motive: From well-compensated marketing teams, to hordes of self-interested proselytizers (see: bitcoin), to propaganda teams looking to influence public opinion, mainstream dark forest sites simply shift the balance of power from the platform itself to the most motivated and well-funded members of the platform