index ✻ questions ✻ memes ✻ me ✻ dev
✻ pets
✻ uses
{1.2a2b1a} virality can spread your story while simultaneously taking away your control of the narrative
topics:
I've been thinking about "tattoogate" on TikTok -- the long story short is that there's a tattoo artist who is overcharging and being incredibly unprofessional. You can kind of tell in the original video that the woman talking about her experience just wanted to vent. But the story has gone viral and more people are sharing their experiences. They're also naming the tattoo artist against the original poster's wishes.
I think it's interesting that people want to go viral to share some kind of story or struggle or to find help, but going viral takes away all of your agency in how the story is told.
Is going viral even a way to tell your story if that's the case? What are people actually hearing? Are they hearing what you want them to? What is the benefit of going viral if it takes away control? Is this ultimately an example of {1.2a2} context collapse -- that your story gets into more hands, but not the hands that are most helpful?
2024-06-24 — This thought occurred to me, in part, because of a Garbage Day newsletter where Broderick mentions that we’re “post-viral”. I cannot find it. It seems like we are passed what viral used to “mean”, but the consequences of virality are still similar.