Christ on a stick. What a bunch of inane self important dribble. I bet you like to fart in a wine glass and smell it.

I have stated my points clearly. The fact that media and correspondence is posted in a public or private fasion is irrelevant.

This platform and others like it are not used as classically considered social media like Facebook point blank period. The function of this platform compared to other social media platforms is not the same it is so drastically different that it should not be categorized as social media. If anything these kinds of platforms are media aggregators or as I like to call them news aggregators. Regardless of your opinions on it and anonymity does play a role here.

The definition of social media is too vague and encompasses too many kinds of websites to be considered useful.

I’m not stating my opinion I’m challenging the fact that platforms like this are considered social media and I’m stating facts as to why that is. So far the only thing you’ve managed to do is “I’m very smart this is what social media is defined as”.

You haven’t actually countered any of my points in any way shape or form.

But you are concerned about the two other people that are going to read this common thread before it gets deleted fantastic. Good on you for thinking of the Everyman.