Starting to lean into properly treating conversational social media as default ephemeral and it's kind of both doing my head in *and* like a full-on revelation.
Really need to go and find and read some papers on social media as used as an evolution of phatic communication.
Therefore and/also, the right to be forgotten is now making so much more sense in terms of a speaker's desire to have their ephemeral conversation removed.
A speaker's right to have their conversational speech removed a distinct form of information than information published by a third party about the subject -- it's much much easier for me to understand and agree with the former right in the public interest.
Nobody be surprised if I yolo into just deleting a shit ton of tweets and posts etc. Casual speech does not deserve by default to be recorded in perpetuity, "if you think about it </late night college dorm>", preserving casual conversation in perpetuity by default now feels perverse. I mean obviously it makes sense from an advertising-extractive commercial pov.
Considering also calling such conversational social media (ie twitter, mastodon, group text threads) *careless media*, in the sense of "conversation without concern".
Why should I leave every single one of my tweets up indefinitely? What am I afraid of? If it is because it is how I have gained a reputation that I treasure, well, I have that reputation now. And I build it better elsewhere, anyway.
No, I think I'm now comfortable with letting speech without a care fly away. I have my own offline archive, if I ever need it.
@danhon oh boy this is extremely relevant to me at the moment. I've got no problem letting my Twitter account drift away into digital rot but am having a harder time with this account. Why? Just b/c it says when I joined? Very silly. Why should it not be ephemeral just like spoken conversations?
