Fair enough. Honestly both of them are rather irrelevant to me because I don't use microblogging social media platforms, so I have no stake in the fight.

[–] grue@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's a naive position. The fact that so many other people use those services means you will be made to care because of their influence on politics etc. Oligarchs like Musk and Zuckerberg having disproportionate control over the public discourse is a threat to you whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

[–] TheSaneWriter@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I live in a Capitalist nation. The ultra-wealthy have held disproportionate control over mass media here for as long as it has existed, and ultimately whether Zuckerberg or Musk win their stupid competition over microblogging honestly won't impact me one way or another. Obviously their right-wing beliefs impact me, and their messaging will generally make politics in the U.S. worse, but this is a genuinely a case where they're both bad and I'm not sure who's worse, so why take a side in the Threads vs. Twitter discourse when I use neither? I like Mastadon as an idea and I think it has good features, but microblogging generally does better with more centralization because it puts all of the influencers, celebrities, and politicians in one place, and normies seem to find Mastadon's federation confusing, so it hasn't taken off.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

Right, they're both awful. But that doesn't mean they're irrelevant to you. Unfortunately.