I imagine it will be referred to at some point...
"We now turn to the matter of the defendant's list of internet bookmarks."
Facebook is passé..I joined it the first year launched waay back in '04 when it was new and you had to use a college .edu email address. I am only there now as people post stuff about sublets and flats and the marketplace offers. Apart from occasionally keeping in touch with far away fam and friends.My daughter is 18 and does not use Facebook. Her crowd see it as being for old age pensioners. They use other kinds of social media of course, including some that are part of Zuckerbergs collection.
I don't use Facebook either, I see it as the domain of chavs and other herberts who just want to continually brag about what bloody bar/restaurant/country they're in, or some other blatantly uninspired guff that I'm not remotely interested in. Stuff Facebook, it's > 90% puerile shit anyway.
Though Telegram was useful for accessing and disseminating propaganda, many jihadists long complained that it was an echo-chamber, where jihadists congregated with like-minded individuals, thus not an effective platform for broader distribution.
Touch of Thread Necromancy,
but worth reading;
Reliance on hard facts isn't that traditional. We have a longer history of relying on rhetoric to win arguments.Actually the first article was worth reading, no so much for anything to with the social media as such, but for recognising the way that the traditional reliance on hard facts seems to be trumped by emotions and feelings, not just in terms of public opinion but also policy making.
Reliance on hard facts isn't that traditional. We have a longer history of relying on rhetoric to win arguments.