Just by posing the question, I'm showing my age, right? Regardless, I think it's time to take a serious look at how social media affects what we perceive as "creative work" or "artistic expression." Based on what I've read and conversations with other creatives, I think there's a perception that social media is indeed killing creativity or at least lowering its quality to the absolute minimum.
I tend to agree just so I don't start a fight. But I have a theory on what's really happening. There are 3 options: 1. Social media is guilty of lowering quality standards thanks to its emphasis on reach and data collection. 2. Creatives are forced to publish more often, thus, lowering the quality of their "content". 3. Most creatives are not that good, and even before social media, most creatives tried to copy whatever the successful ones were doing (ouch).
Which option is guilty? All of the above, in my opinion. Let me explain.
Social media doesn't care about quality. As a media company, they only care about having more eyeballs glued to the screen. That's it. Of course, high-quality content has a greater chance of standing out, but that's not the primary metric for the algorithm. Now, let's all consider this: the fact that the barrier of entry to media plummeted thanks to social platforms doesn't mean that everyone's content will succeed. And that's one of the reasons why many creative professionals are doing silly dances to the same music, giving away the same "5 tips for increasing your reach," and making the exact same jokes over and over again. One that makes me want to break my phone every time is the one that goes: "I'm a photographer, and I took this photo" --> Black screen --> The photographer didn't take out the lens cap. I swear I have seen it like 28 times.
Yes, but no. Yes, the fact that social media only rewards you for publishing twice a day does force you to lower your standards. After all, no one can produce 2 masterpieces a day, right? But no, you don't have to do it. You can post once a week and be fine. Heck, close all your social media accounts, and you can still make it as an artist or creative. Social media is not everything. It's a saturated marketplace that isn't driven by creative quality.
This one is going to sting. I hear many people say that creatives and artists are becoming mediocre due to the push of social media to produce lower-quality content. But I think there's no decline in quality. The problem is that now we have simultaneous access to top-level work and mediocre and crappy content. Without a gatekeeper that ensure that we only see the best creative pieces, beginners, mediocre creatives, and low-level artists are no longer left out of the media, thus out of our orbit. Social media shows us finished masterpieces and the drafts of an amateur in the same place, but that doesn't change the fact that the outstanding creatives represent a tiny fraction of the total.
Also, let’s not forget that social media introduced a lot of opportunities and interesting avenues that helped give birth to great pieces of art that would have been impossible to achieve before. So, yes, social media has a lot of cons when it comes to creativity and art. But, no, the decline in quality is not entirely Zuck’s fault; we as creatives might need to take a little more responsibility for that.
There you go, that's my attempt to answer the question.
What do you think? Am I wrong? Am I crazy? Let me know.
תגובות