//
sign in
Profile
by @danabra.mov
Profile
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
Profile
by @jimpick.com
AviHandle
by @danabra.mov
AviHandle
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
AviHandle
by @katherine.computer
EventsList
by @katherine.computer
ProfileHeader
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileHeader
by @danabra.mov
ProfileMedia
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePlays
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileReplies
by @danabra.mov
Record
by @atsui.org
Skircle
by @danabra.mov
StreamPlacePlaylist
by @katherine.computer
+ new component
Profile
Loading...
ananny.org - Media technologies & production cultures - How sociotechnical systems enact theories of press freedom & “the public” - GenAI as a public problem Associate Professor of Communication & Journalism, USC Annenberg Always 🇨🇦
Mike Ananny









Loading...
Last thought: I get that gov't & advisors want to curb power of social media platforms & tech companies---I wholeheartedly agree!---but I'm consistently perplexed at the naiveness of solutions, ignorance of solutions' downstream impacts, & thin appreciations of the complexities of online cultures.
I'm sensing pattern in Cdn digital tech policymaking: - big rhetoric & splashy announcements - vague frameworks lacking key details - unworkable solutions w/o deep grounding in complexities of online culture & platform political economies - no mitigation of downstream impacts - the environment?
Such bizarre policymaking: - gov't *knows* platforms are unsafe for all (not just <16); - takes fingers-crossed gamble that ban makes platforms heel; - no evidence bans work; - no amelioration of ban effects on kids' development; - kids are policy guinea pigs for bigger problem left un-tackled.