Home | Notifications | New Note | Local | Federated | Search | Logout
Note Detail
Reply to @strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz
Strypey@strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz (2026-04-15 06:44:22)
I've posted here at least a couple of times about the difference between "social networks" (many-to-many, relationship-based), and "social media" (one-to-many, content-based). I said that the fediverse can accommodate both, but they come with very different design and deployment considerations.
(3/?)
---Reply---
Strypey@strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz (2026-04-15 06:55:31)
I've noticed that mainstream use of "social media" is mostly following Jonathan Haidt's usage to describe only the mostly parasocial DataFarming platforms;
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/16/podcasts/jonathan-haidt-strikes-again-what-you-vibecoded-an-update-on-the-forkiverse.html
So in response, I'll reframe the above as 2 kinds of social networks;
* social communication networks: many-to-many, relationship-based, ephemeral, eg Mastodon, Friendica, Misskey, GoToSocial
* social publishing networks: one-to-many, content-based, persistent, eg PeerTube, FunkWhale, WriteFreely, BandWagon
(4/?)
Reply
---Replies---
Strypey@strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz (2026-04-15 07:03:48)
Now having given these software projects as examples, I want to make it clear I'm describing use patterns, either of which can be applied to any software.
After decades of blogging, I can't help thinking of what I do on Mastodon as publishing. I link to my old posts and dig through them to find stuff, just like I do on my blogs. Conversely someone could use PeerTube to do video blogging, auto-deleting their old posts after a while like people do with their micro-posting accounts.
(5/?)