Social media platforms and new criteria for success
Social media sites and digital delivery platforms have provided spaces for content creators, even lifted some of them to stardom, and provided millions of people with stimulating financial income.
There is no doubt that social media platforms have raised the ceiling of free speech and paved the way for many TV channels and stardom. Materials from tweeters and videographers have become a source of information for many media outlets.
However, the relationship between content creators and owners of social media sites has been subject to terms dictated by a party, in which the rights of the producing party and the primary source of the material that powers these sites and platforms are almost absent.
We know very well that YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, or any other platform could not have made any financial profit without the presence of a video, photo or written story, and these platforms can have no reason to exist as such. well without the presence of a consumer (viewer, reader, etc.).
So, what are these services provided by social networking sites? and who are they?
Are they publishing and distribution companies?
Are they technology partners publishing the content they receive from their readers, subscribers, viewers, and creators?
Note that the analysis and evaluation of hundreds of millions of videos and tweets is purely algorithmic and rarely involves human intervention.
When was this done? Since when does the robot have the right to evaluate a poem, a story or any other creation?!
Do you know when?
Since the objective has become the number of members of the herd who follow this or that site, since we have decided that our value is equal to the number of stars, likes and views that we collect from a post or a Photo.
But the danger is not only there, wait for the money to get involved.
The financial value of the product we upload to YouTube will not be determined by the publisher (YouTube, in this case) under a commercial contract. Instead, view count is the only publisher-defined metric.
Moreover, to hold on to the literary value of the creative work, more than the viewer’s criterion may be needed to be fair to the producer and the product.
The number of views for videos containing nudity or sexual acts are in the hundreds of millions, and their owners and publishing platforms reap substantial financial benefits. Thus, the number of views cannot be considered a fair measure of compensation for content creators.
The texts of most contracts between content creators and digital platforms are almost contracts of compliance with the terms of such and such a platform without the latter providing the weakest guarantees with regard to the conditions of fair competition.
How is it conceivable that the number of views is the criterion of financial gain if we compare a sex or erotic clip to an academic or scientific conference with an educational vocation?
Is the production cost of a series of math lessons, for example, the same as that of a video of a young woman dancing half-naked? However, the evaluation and financial compensation criteria must take into account the intellectual value and educational vision of this product; instead, the number of views becomes proof of success and excellence.
The role that video platforms and social networking sites play in destroying values, undermining diligence and raising levels of irrelevance is dangerous and harmful to the future of young people and offers them a way to win easy money that does not depend, in essence, on hard work and diligence.
This opinion may seem strange and isolated in its assessment of updated definitions of the term success, and young readers may see it as traditional, conservative, and lacking in modern-day vision. However, the truth is that all human societies today are on the brink of moral collapse because of this systematic invasion and most of the proposed solutions lack an alternative strategy.
No one is against the display, publication and social media platforms exchanging the material of their subscribers according to participatory contracts in which the gains are for both parties. However, I oppose wide gates for all types of products on an equal footing regardless of value.
YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Tik Tok and others should have provided financial incentives for young people interested in scientific and intellectual research. Inventors and creators should get a bigger share of the incentives, regardless of the number of views. These platforms are supposed to automatically promote their products to create role models for young people instead of being proud of the number of views they get through trivial, empty and sometimes dangerous content with catastrophic consequences for their mental health.
Why is financial compensation for digital content so important?
What is the relationship between the financial result and the fight against insignificance?
The answer, in short, lies in the organic relationship between profit and the level of young people’s interest in trivial content.
The answer, more frankly, is that social networks, if not unleashed, will become a threat to the future of entire generations.
A child of the 21st century is born with an electronic device in hand, be it a cell phone, an iPad or something else. From this moment, he becomes a consumer of any product!
If the new definition of “success” is likes, clicks, followers, and views, don’t blame your kids for chasing clicks and views and not paying attention to their lessons.
We have failed miserably to stem the waves of superficiality, pettiness and intellectual distortion that afflict future generations and the future of our societies.
It all happens in front of the eyes of lawmakers, officials, and politicians who use these platforms to promote their election campaigns. So that these platforms become richer and the dilemma more and more complex.
How long will we be watching without doing anything?
How long will we allow ignorance to consume our most precious human asset, namely future generations?
I think the time is right to establish checks and balances and conditions that allow us to use these platforms in service of the consumer and sometimes to get in the way when the financial benefit outweighs the moral and to prevent it from turning into a weather bomb.
More by author
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Newslooks.com