"Good button design is crucial for a positive user experience. The goal is to make buttons intuitive, easy to use, and - predictable. But is the disclosure, about participating in social media and expressing approval, full and revealing? I guess it all comes down to what you would define as a "positive experience". As I write this, two messed up, intertwined things are happening. Both can be directly linked to how the engagement dynamics of social media, driven by technology such as "like" buttons,"
"First, a social media celebrity and political influencer, Charlie Kirk, has been shot dead, in what feels like a political assassination, in the USA. Like some others, I cannot claim that I had no idea who he was. Though I was not the intended demographic of his content, it was curated for me anyway by Youtube's reels algorithm. I recognised what he represented, and the dangerous trajectory of this brand of politics."
Good button design aims for intuitive, easy-to-use, and predictable interactions, yet disclosure about social participation and expressions of approval can be incomplete. Engagement dynamics driven by like buttons and similar technologies incentivize attention, emotional reactions, and amplification of polarizing material. Algorithmic curation can surface political influencers to unintended demographics, reinforcing exposure to extreme or divisive viewpoints. The shooting of political influencer Charlie Kirk exemplifies how online political coarsening can translate into real-world harm. Design and amplification choices in social platforms shape public discourse and can contribute to unstable political environments.
Read at Medium
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]