Hi, hello!, and happy weekend. You’re reading the Saturday edition of Links I Would Gchat You If We Were Friends: a lovingly curated collection of brand-new writing on internet culture and technology, culled from the hundreds of RSS feeds I read each week for this ~express~ purpose.
I understand that lots of people are re-evaluating their media and information diets in the aftermath of the U.S. presidential election. Hundreds of thousands of users have left Elon Musk’s X for alternative platforms, like Bluesky and Threads; many of you have (kindly!!) written to tell me that you’re relying more on Links in this new environment.
If you find yourself turning to Links as an alternative to the cacophony of mainstream social networks, or if you find yourself opening these emails every weekend, please consider supporting this work with a paid subscription. You’ll get a sticker and a snail-mail thank-you note from me, access to additional fiction, TV and podcast recommendations and the satisfaction of knowing you have directly and measurably contributed to the long-term sustainability of this lil indie journalism operation. Thanks to those of you who’ve already upgraded since the election, or in the weeks and months prior to that — y’all are, and will always be, the reason I do this. xx
If you read anything this weekend
“Don’t Underestimate the Rogansphere,” by Sam Wolfson for The Guardian. I don’t read or share a ton of straight opinion-writing, and as I read this I did very much wish that someone would actually report out Wolfson’s theory that men turn to podcasters in lieu of relationships. As theories go, however, it’s … intriguing! And it fits the general structure and production of these shows, which last many, many hours and book slates of guests for freewheeling, prolix conversations. (Incidentally, TIL that the adjective “prolix” means “too wordy”; I picked up that SAT gem in this New Yorker essay, which explores similar themes.)
The shows’ structures are similar: they’re kind of boring, kind of personal, unedited, the research perfunctory, conjecture flows freely, conclusions are delusive, the people who host them are not that smart, and so it’s easy to get cozy in the warm blanket of male grievance with a man who believes war crimes are justified and women shouldn’t serve in the military. Fox News screeches at you until you’re terrified; these shows lull you in until you’re at ease.
“The Fantasy of Cozy Tech,” by Kyle Chayka for The New Yorker. *Speaking* of cozy — and I am making an intentional point here, juxtaposing these two — Kyle Chayka has a great piece out this week on the specific aesthetics and values of cozy gaming and “coziness,” in general. The notion that people pursue stylized comfort as an antidote to loneliness immediately registered with me, and I don’t think that’s limited to the types of cozy people find on-screen.
By contrast, the archetypal cozy figure at her desk, plugged into multiple screens, is an image of loneliness which is also meant to assuage loneliness. #Coziness, in a way, stylizes isolation, making it look desirable. This is an old paradox of the digital world: the same platforms that provide connection also have a way of cutting us off. But #cozygaming suggests that the solution is to surround yourself with yet more gadgets and devices, whether an ergonomic Aeron desk chair, a video projector that turns your wall into a scene from “Harry Potter,” or a new A.I. companion who follows your every move. As Friend’s Avi Schiffmann told me, “I do think the loneliness crisis was created by technology, but I do think it will be fixed by technology.”
“The Promise of Duolingo,” by Imogen West-Knights for The Dial. We’re going to Paris and Munich in December — please send me your restaurant recommendations!! — and that has occasioned Jason and I to re-download Duolingo once again. On one hand, I know a cat or orange will hate to see me coming. (I hope to soon progress to more relevant vocab.) On the other hand, as Duolingo itself knows very well, the app is not actually a good way to learn to speak a new language. I liked West-Knights’ dissection of that phenomenon, and her interviews with the people obsessed with Duo. (“One user, a historian named Agnes, told me she forced herself to complete her daily lesson while in labor.”) I also appreciated her conclusion that the efficacy of the thing may not ultimately matter that much: “If you use the rowing machine in the gym twice a week for several years, does it matter that you never get very good at rowing on water?”
“Nara Smith Is Craving More,” by Alessandra Codinha for Who What Wear. Is this the first-ever Who What Wear article in Links? I think … probably! But I love a profile of Nara Smith, and this one included both a stunning fashion spread and a number of revelations that really struck/persuaded me. Smith, it turns out, is not all that religious. She’s looking to work outside the home. And she emphatically is not planning to have any more children. I’m ready to concede that she’s not a tradwife, and I regret tarring her with the label. In fact, I’m being forced to examine my own bias here: If Nara Smith weren’t so hot and young and Mormon … wouldn’t I have classed her as just another “cooking influencer”?
About that “news influencers report” … On Monday, the Pew Research Center published a 122-page report on the reach and demographics of “news influencers”: “individuals who regularly post about current events and civic issues on social media and have at least 100,000 followers.” The research slots really nicely into ongoing conversations about the fragmentation of mainstream media and the role of alternative interlocutors in the election; as a result, I think, there’s been quite a lot of analysis suggesting that this report says something new, and maybe bad, about trends in online discourse and big-j Journalism.
I’m less convinced, which is not a knock on Pew or any downstream analysts. This was a fascinating, comprehensive report, and I’m glad we have it (!). But I think it’s worth remembering that this report studied the full universe of large accounts that post about current events. Some of those accounts compete with old-school media; others complement or represent it. Without some kind of historic yardstick, it’s hard to say that this point-in-time count indicates any larger trends or changes. We had “news influencers” 10 years ago, too. We just didn’t give them the same credence. Anyway, this is my pitch for always reading the appendix.
In case you missed it
The most-clicked link from last weekend’s edition was this random and occasionally poetic collection of screenshots from various writers’ “Notes” app.
For the mid-week edition, I partnered with journalist and podcast host Cristen Conger on a guide to America’s sex-trafficking panic. This was a fun one (!). You can also hear my full conversation with Cristen here.
Postscripts
AI ads take a tasteless turn. Substack pivots to politics. Why boredom is up, despite … everything. Why AI can’t save languages. “Every single person should be worried.” The real purpose of Pokemon Go. Happy birthday to WoW and Google Scholar — both 20 years old!
The splintering of social media. The “visual icon of the modern literary era.” AI pimping. PDF to brainrot. Tamagotchis are getting pretty real now. A series of (underseas) tubes. Private chefs of the tech elite. How much “movie” you have left. How AI systems trained on films and TV. The pick-your-own-algorithm era. Can confirm: My Gen Z students adore Dancing With the Stars. Last but not least: This failed to convince me that “situationships” are a novel or uniquely Gen Z phenom.
BELOW the paywall you’ll also find:
This week’s fiction, TV and additional article recommendations
Unlocked links from the The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Atlantic
That’s it for this week! Until the next one. Warmest virtual regards,
Caitlin
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Links I Would Gchat You If We Were Friends to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.