Do you consider Lemmy/Reddit (and similar platforms) to be social media?
Do you consider Lemmy/Reddit (and similar platforms) to be social media?
I had this discussion with a friend, and we really couldn't reach a consensus.
My friend thinks Lemmy (and other Reddit-like platforms) is social media because you're interacting with other people, liking/disliking submissions, and all the content is user-generated.
I think it isn't because you're not following individual people, just communities/topics. Though I concede there are some aspects of social media present, I feel that overall it's not because my view of social media is that you're primarily following individuals.
In my view, these link aggregator + comment platforms are more like an evolution of forums which both my friend and I agreed don't meet the criteria to be considered social media (though they maintain that Reddit-like platforms are social media while I do not).
So I'm asking Lemmy now to weigh in to help settle this friendly debate.
Edit: Thanks everyone! From the comments, it sounds like my friend and I are both right and both wrong. lol. Feel free to keep chiming in, but I have to go do the 9-5 thing that pays my mortgage and cloud hosting bills.
I prefer to think of them as antisocial media.
If I have to concede this argument to my buddy, that's how I'm going to do it: antisocial media š
This is due to the anonymity of the situation and is the same direction my own answer went. Iām betting I know where this question came from, and Iād also bet courts would lean the other direction, based on the intent.
ive had this argument going for at least a decade. I agree with you, it is not social media. i dont think forums are social media any more than usenet.
its why i calll my instance a 'nonsense aggregator', as your verbiage also alludes to.
that said, im using an mbin server.. and the microblog/twitverse piece does seem to jump into the social media arena. so my server product is now integrated with that category whether i like it or not.
I love the term "nonsense aggregator" xD
Usenet's also a good comparison, and yeah, not social media.
Definitely agree on K/Mbin straddling the line because of its microblogging feature.
I think that Lemmy and Reddit are 100% social media.
Common/Wiki definition:
Social media are interactive technologies that facilitate the creation, sharing and aggregation of content, ideas, interests, and other forms of expression through virtual communities and networks.
Content aggregators aren't discluded. Especially in this case where original content can and does exist.
The biggest difference, I believe, as to why Lemmy is social media and a typical forum is not, is the sorting. In a forum, the discussion is chronological as in a conversation. Here, more likes gets you more noticed. In content AND in discussion. Thus there is incentive. Whether you care about likes or not, it exist and so does incentive for social relevancy. It drives what you see.
Next becomes use case. You CAN sort the comments chronologically, but nobody does that. You CAN just read and never post, but people also do that on Instagram. Maybe you don't care about likes and aren't trying to get them. But they exist, and other users do care. If I didn't care about Facebook likes, it's still social media.
Whether you like it or not, everything is socially manipulated on this site.
Maybe you don't feel the negative effects that are typically associated with social media, and that's great. But some people here do and can get angry/upset/defensive about being down voted. Either way, those effects are not a part of the definition, although the connotation does exist. And the same could be said about any social media. Some people are more headstrong and less effected. This site is not nearly as predatory as the big ones and (depending on your communities) don't always have the intent to drive your emotional response. But those communities and users do exist.
I only have Instagram installed because there's a few people who send me (usually political) clips so we can chat about them when we hang out or text. I'm not following anyone I know. I have added a few of the creators. I've never once liked or reposted anything. So can I now say Instagram isn't social media?
Perhaps subcategories could be created, but that's besides the point. This site absolutely fits at least that one definition, which removes all connotation and defensive argument that can be had.
OP is here interacting with a network of users sharing ideas that are being sorted by popularity, then viewing other posts sorted by popularity. This is socially driven media.
I think youāre both right. Itās really a semantic argument over what āsocialā means in the phrase āsocial networkā.
For me I tend to agree with your interpretation. I suspect itās because the phrase came into popular use(see Google Trend screenshot below) and in reference to the Xengas, MySpaces, and Facebooks of the world that were user-centric rather than the forums and BBS type paradigms that were more topic centric.
If youāre interacting with other users then thereās 0 question itās social media.
You're literally asking a question for other people to answer. How is that any less social media than Twitter or Facebook? People post their personal achievements all the time, etc. If you respond to me, are we not having a social interaction?
How is it not social media?
Because by that criteria every web page that's ever had a comment box is "social media".
Social media to me is, as the guy said, defined by the fact that you're following a person/persona, not a topic.
This site and other sites like it are link aggregators. If you wanted to, you could use and contribute to a link aggregator without ever writing or indeed reading a comment.
We are, somehow, socializing here. And here is a kind of media. So, yes, it is a social media.
YouTube is also a social media.
Social media is a generic concept and should not be limited to Facebook/Instagram-like platforms.
That's basically my friend's argument. And I can see your/their point.
My argument against it basically boils down to the scope of what you follow. Following a group/community vs individual users. e.g. If I posted this on a forum back in 1997, we'd be having this discussion in a similar manner (though probably not threaded).
That, and "social media" carries a kind of stigma from the engagement algorithms they all use. Granted, that's not a requirement for something to be technically social media, but it's definitely something most people associate with it.
Algorithms is a consequence. Most of social medias are profitable, so they want you to be engaged as much as possible. At the beginning of Facebook or even the late Orkut, they were only a simple platform with no algorithm that only shows stuff like a showcase.
But as soon as Facebook starts to make money showing ads, algorithms started to become a thing. But look, it was a social media already.
Also, was Orkut a social media? Cause it was really close from what Reddit/Lemmy is today.
About forums I think there is a subtle difference. Forums are, generally speaking, communities driven with on purpose only, inside another website. For example, we can enter Acer website and go to the forums, which is used to talk about Acer products and support. Any other topic is off-topic, therefore deleted.
When forums are aggregated into a huge platform that can have different communities, with easy to-go click and follow this community, there is no specific topic and you can join any type of content you want with only one account, I call it social media, cause it's different enough from forums and the main purpose is people interacting with each other
I don't know anyone from Lemmy IRL. No one on here blows up my phone while I'm at work or trying to sleep. I'm not "following" anyone. I don't hate myself and everyone else every time I log on here. I'd say it is NOT social media
Yes. I also consider forums to be social media, but the good kind.
Many people here are being incredibly pedantic about the words "social media", forgetting entirely that "social media" is a term invented to describe a certain type of website. Forums existed before the term was being widely used, for example, and whilst they would fit a dictionary definition of the words within the term they were always considered a separate entity to what was established as being 'social media' (e.g.: Myspace, Bebo, Facebook, etc.).
I'm with you, OP.
This. Maybe I'm getting old but I really get frustrated when people start calling everything social media. In particular, I keep hearing people group YouTube and communicators like Discord or even freaking WhatsApp under this label.
I don't consider them social media.
Virtually nothing on it is about the poster, and that's mostly how I see social media. Even more baffling is people calling YouTube social media.
Two important caveats though.
-
maybe r/JohnQSmith type things are prevalent just not in my experience. There's plenty of content I've never seen.
-
The descriptivists won the day, so language is about what people do say not what people should say. If people call it that and the dictionary or whatever says something different, the speakers aren't wrong. The dictionary is wrong.
-
Op you can follow Reddit and Lemmy users just the same as on Facebook or Twitter. So by your own definition, Reddit and Lemmy are forms of social media.
To me they are social media.
You can also follow topics/communities on other platforms, and on Reddit you can follow people/accounts.
There's not much difference.
Yeah it's more like a sliding scale where some platforms are deeply about following people, and some about topics, but I'm the end it's all social media.
I think one aspect OP didn't talk about is anonymity, for me the biggest differentiator is that on lemmy/Reddit you have no idea who the accounts are most of the time (and more importantly, nobody knows who you are).
I think they're antisocial media. Reddit more than lemmy, though, which feels a bit like a community sometimes.
It's media where you interact with other people. So yeah.
It's more to a content aggregator.
IMO Lemmy is a social media, it allows people to socialize over shared interests. It doesn't need to facilitate IRL connections, even though they are likely to happen.
I don't think they are, they're more akin to forums.
In my mind, social media is where you follow people and people broadcast their lives. That's the social aspect of it.
With Reddit and Lemmy we follow communities on topics we're interested in.
I do get the arguments for it to be social media but that just makes the category way too broad, as you could argue any site with a comment section is social media.
as you could argue any site with a comment section is social media.
I disagree with that. If the main purpose of your site is not interaction, so it cannot be a social media. Lemmy, Reddit, Kbin and other platforms like that has the main purpose share of knowledge and interaction between peers
For example, I may have a blog and this blog has a comment section in my posts. However, despite people can interact with each other in the comment section, the main purpose of my blog is post my own content. The interaction between people is secondary and consequence.
But in Lemmy the main purpose is interact. If not enough people participate, Lemmy dies. There is no other reason to use Lemmy other than interact with people.
you could argue any site with a comment section is social media.
Which I would, tbh, although it's a limited form of SM, since sharing of top level content is very restricted to those with control of the site.
It's in the same class IMO as sites which are more open, like Lemmy/Reddit/FB/Twitter - they are perhaps more focused on SM as a primary function, while comment sections are a secondary aspect of, say, a news site. But the presence of shared discussion of whatever topic is at the top makes them SM for me.
To me Reddit like platforms are glorified forums. And I don't mean it as an insult.
yes, but the key difference is how its. typically used. reddit/lemmy is generally following specific topics while other forms of social media tend to follow specific people or organizations
so yes, both imo are forms of social media, but brcause of how you interact more with it is different, it feels like it's not the same.
Yes, they just don't do the whole personal algorithm thing.
I think it's possible to use it like social media and a few people do. One obvious/dumb example would be Lord Douchewad himself: spez.
However, IMHO 99.9999% of people who use it anonymously are social media adjacent, but not on social media.
I can see good arguments to the contrary. Semantics.
Yeah, I agree it's likely just a matter of semantics.
Lol, what started this discussion was that I said I didn't use any social media and my buddy was like, "What? You're on Lemmy all the time".
I get that same gotcha from people, too. Even if they are technically correct, they should be a good friend and acknowledge what you really meant. Flexing on Facebook or LinkedIn or whatever is very different from shitposting on here or reddit.
It's just awkward and unnecessary to have to say "verified user social media versus anonymous social media" when we can lump Meta, X, and Microsoft under Social Media as a blanket term.
I guess the blanket term for reddit and Lemmy and 4chan type sites could be "meme sites" or "link sharing sites" or whatever.
We need a cool new term for it, one that is easy to say and memorable. Fediverse is pretty cool, but only applies to a subset of those.
I believe it's in the same family of web environment as social media, but not necessarily the same clade of it.
Like comparing different romance languages.
"social media" is the rebranded name for what they used to call "Web 2.0", which refers to websites where the content both comes from users and is associated with user accounts.
Both reddit and lemmy clearly fit the bill just as much as livejournal and blogger do.
I've never seen Reddit as social media, more like a forum. Though I felt it was getting more like social media in recent years. But in one discussion such as this is was pointed out that forums pretty much are social media, they just existed before the term existed.
Then it dawned on me. Reddit didn't become more like social media - it always was one. It was just the enshitification that made it more like the other social media that I was noticing.
Lemmy is medium through which we are having social interactions. So yeah.
So yes i do think it is social media. But they are more akin to the old internet, or Facebook before it got massive and bad.
For exampke? There is not a massive algorithm, especially a personalized algorithm (obviously Top and Hot are technically algorithms, but they democratically place popular posts to anyone who hasn't blocked/is following the community).
For many comparisons they are obviously social media, but for other types of comparisons I don't think it's a great match.
I would say yes, it's a form of social media. An online place where, media and ideas can be shared by anyone (subject to membership requirements if any), and where there's a built-in way for the public to discuss and rate those shared items.
No, not at all. I don't consider forums social media. Something like Kbin might fall into the social media category though.
I do not, while yes you can socialize I think it intended to be used as an aggregator unlike other sites. Much like you can discuss(forum) and shop in other social media sites.
Primarily anonymous forum style communication are social media like bicycles, scooters, and skateboards are vehicles.
Technically yes, but not really what people think about when they talk about vehicles.
Absolutely social media. On Facebook i mostly followed groups - cannabis, gardening, work related interests, local news, etc. Same as here.
Yeah.
Lemmy is social media. Reddit is sociopath media
It's social media and how social media can be a useful utility without preying on its user base by selling info or advertising shoddy products or whatever.
The term social media is descriptive of an interactive web client like a chat forum. It's not necessarily bad the way propaganda is not necessarily false or malicious.
I think it's a massive forum.
I think of social media as Facebook where it's your real name and contacts who you interact with (primarily anyway).
But this is any number of topics you can go in and out of, with a huge array of strangers that you may or may not interact with again. More links, discussion, specialities.
You can get into precise definitions to force Lemmy/Reddit into social media, but I'm still forum.
Aren't forums technically social media as well?
I don't really think it matters to have some context-free definition. It certainly is very much like social media in a lot of ways, and even you seem to acknowledge that. Unless your friend is trying to compare reddit like apps to Facebook in ways it isn't like Facebook, how you label them doesn't matter.
I feel like it's similar to social media, but serves a different purpose at least in my use of it. With social media sites like Facebook and Instagram I'm mostly interacting with people I know in real life. To me it seems closer to Youtube, because for both of those it connects me more to larger cultural or artistic things, rather than what's going on with my friends.
Fell like it could be used as social media, but I tend to use it as a forum
No
It's all social media as the content of the site is generated by users interacting with each other.
The difference you've identified is between individualist & content-focused social media.
Most networks are the individualist kind, you follow people and they post about their lives for the most part
Reddit & lemmy are primarily content focused social media as you follow topics and post about them
So, I think forums are a form of social media, so trying to say this is a forum and not social media isn't a good argument for me.
I don't think they are. In my view, social media is either personal ( i.e. pictures on Facebook, Instagram, or Snapchat ) or short + very mainstream ( Twitter, TikTok). Reddit has too many niches that collectively make up an enormous chunk of the platform, plus it is very anonymous. I'd argue that the same is true of YouTube, and a lot of the content is closer to TV and journalism.