January: Part 2 '23
Spirituality, tradition, and "content" in the modern era
The Prophecy, 2021 by Kent Monkman (b. 1965)
The News
Gonna be a short news segment since I haven’t been following things the past couple weeks (more focused on the opinion pieces in the “Ideas” section below).
Prince Harry: You’re Spare Parts Bud
Prince Harry released his memoir last week to record setting book sales and followed it up by doing several interviews surrounding its content (seems like quaint timing given the recent passing of the late Queen). Of note, he goes on record discussing how he got frostbite on his “todger” during his 2011 trek across the North Pole:
My penis was oscillating between extremely sensitive and borderline traumatized. The last place I wanted to be was Frostnipistan.
And notes how a friend recommended applying Elizabeth Arden cream to the effected area, to which his initial (reluctant) response was:
my mum used that on her lips…
But then ultimately decides to use the cream and writes in the memoir:
I found a tube, and the minute I opened it, the smell transported me through time. I felt as if my mother was right there in the room. Then I took a smidge and applied it...down there.
Uhhhh - what the f**k?
Ideas
California: Spirituality and Tradition
In the interior wilderness no one is bloodied by history, and it is no coincidence that that the Pentecostal churches have their strongest hold in places where Western civilization has its most superficial hold. There are more than twice as many Pentecostal as Episcopal churches in Los Angeles.
Joan Didion (The White Album)
I finished this collection of essays by Joan Didion last weekend and have been mulling on this quote all week. For starters, its important to know the difference between the Pentecostal and Episcopal sects of the Christian church:
Pentecostal
Think “charismatic”
Energetic sermons
Doesn’t necessarily ascribe to “a lifetime of sin”
Very conservative theologically and socially (long skirts and abstain from things like makeup)
Origins date back to LA in the early 1900s
Episcopal
More traditional
Largest communion in America
Socially and theologically more liberal
Often considered to be halfway between Catholicism and Protestantism
Origins date back to times of the Revolutionary War when terms like “Anglican” and “Church of England” were out of favor
Source: https://christianityfaq.com/episcopalian-pentecostal-comparison/
Open Questions
Why, in southern California of all places, would a movement like this spring up and have such sustained success?
Nowadays there are 4x as many Pentecostal churches in California as there are Episcopal (Didion wrote The White Album primarily in the 1970s)
What sort of people are most drawn in by Pentecostal religious sects?
What does this tell us about our culture?
It almost seems like a revolt against nihilistic/consumeristic/etc tendencies that are the most concentrated in places like LA?
But why Pentecostal and not a more “traditional” Christian sect?
"Content" in Today's Day & Age
Part of me starting this Substack stems from some reflection I’ve done the past few months on the notion of producing versus consuming content. And its not that I wanted to join the fray and start a Podcast about dating or a YouTube channel that inspires the next era of young adults to “get fit”. Rather, I just often found myself pondering “content” and the means it has to influence one’s daily habituations.
A few random thoughts on this idea:
For decades, Hollywood has had immense influence on what people are watching, thinking, and talking about. While there are other alternatives to getting a movie/tv-series made nowadays - there are still a handful of production execs in LA that hold immense sway over what the majority of American’s see pop up on their TV screen and the subsequent discussion that is had at the dinner table over hors d'oeuvres.
While there are a myriad of different content sources nowadays (podcasts, news channels, publications, social media, etc) — and one can see the obvious benefit of multiple sources — is this always a good thing? I heard someone say recently that society in the 1800s and early 1900s was much more congenial because we all read the same books and newspapers. All ate at the same restaurants. All shopped at the same stores. Imagine that - attending a dinner party where you were all informed off the same opinion and could debate it in the same window of context.
The model for “successful content” will always be at its root self centered. News channels will always be incentivized to talk “crime” over “budget cuts”. TikTok reels and YouTube feeds will naturally be catered to you and your interests because that is what is gonna get you to scroll for 20 more minutes than originally planned. The incentive structure for popularized “content” is all wrong if you’re expecting something integrous.
There is an audience for pretty much everything. If you made videos where you did paint-by-number whilst crooning love songs to your cat you’d find someone who’d subscribe. I think sexual fetishes serve as case and point for this argument. I mean, come on, women’s feet? Really?
The Cunningham Memo
With the declassification of the Cunningham Memo by the House Congressional Committee several months back (last July I believe) - the public was given an opportunity to peer into the knowledge, strategy, and concerns that Meta (formerly known as Facebook) has when it comes to it's social media platforms. And probably not surprisingly, its about what anyone would suspect. Meta (and other companies like it) have a wealth of data it captures from it's users - and they have a strategy intrinsically tied to their user research - as any business minded executive(s) should. That said, it doesn't hide the fact that the contents of this internal memo are indicative of a worldwide society that is becoming ever-more-dependent upon social media platforms. And that's whether they are cognizant of this fact or not.
Upon first hearing of the memo's declassification, I spent a few hours one weekday morning, before starting my actual job, reading the memo and highlighting the anecdotes that were of nominal interest. Let's start from the top.
Social Networks do Not Typically Remain Limited to Demographic Subgroups, Apart from Teens. E.g.
We do not typically find that adoption is tightly constrained along lines of gender, region, or social class. Instead, social apps typically are adopted at the level of a country as a whole, although adoption rates vary substantially. The one important exception is that teens often adopt a social app different from those around them (e.g., teens using SnapChat, Instagram).
Its interesting to see, internally, that Meta recognizes its adoption is largely dependent on the broader society taking up a given platform. Wouldn't be surprised if this results in Facebook/WhatsApp/Instagram targeting ads online to the culture of an entire country - versus targeting a class/profession/gender/race.
Secondly, the fact that Meta recognized the unique opportunity that teens present from an adoption standpoint is not surprising whatsoever. Especially given the strong parallel to big tobacco's focus on bringing on new young smokers throughout the 20th century. Young people are inherently more pliable - and the data Meta harvests simply backs this supposition.
Once Users Start Using a Social App, their Use Declines Slowly (Ratchet Effect)
This ratchet effect should be both reassuring and concerning. It is reassuring because it implies we are unlikely to see any network undergo a rapid decline. It is concerning because it means that, when we see small declines in visitation, they could reflect significant declines in underlying demand or market-fit
Moreover, we see Meta recognize that their own product loses its engagement over time. Not all that surprising.
Multiple accounts on Instagram.
Around 10% of people on IG have a secondary account, and perhaps half of those use it to maintain a secondary audience. Graph overlap is quite low between primary and secondary accounts
As an Instagram user myself, before seeing this statistic, I would have presumed ~1% of Instagram users maintain a secondary account. I also would have presumed that the audience overlap would be relatively high. The anecdotal evidence for this presumption being that most of the folks in my network seem to spinoff secondary accounts for either fitness or promoting a small business (sometimes both). The fact that 10% of Instagram users maintain a secondary account is wildly surprising. What are these secondary accounts being used for? Stalking exes? Following all the "influencers" you are ashamed to follow with your primary account?
TL;DR - Social media and the ways we use it speak to our society writ large (and unsurprisingly, its not all that endearing).
The full subcommittee investigative report can be found here.
Some Literature
Just a quote this time.
“Do you mean to tell me that you’re thinking seriously of building that way, when and if you are an architect?”
“Yes.”
“My dear fellow, who will let you?”
“That’s not the point. The point is, who will stop me?”
-Ayn Rand (The Fountainhead)