If you've noticed any artists talking strangely/much more seemingly uncredited art on your Twitter timeline recently, it's probably because of a recent algorithmic phenomenon that someone (allegedly) discovered: basically, pretending to be a random reposter who just found a bunch of cool art to share apparently gets you more views and engagement than presenting it as your own and talking about it normally.
The truth of this is...debatable (the original post seems to have been removed https://twitter.com/rsdream12/status/1773782882718273993)-- certain keywords and tags (or the lack thereof) might have had a greater effect on the original 'experiment' than the faƧade itself. But enough people apparently saw some truth in it to take it to heart/discuss it at length, and I was wondering what the artists around here think. ^^;
Art that's stolen and reposted without credit often DOES get much more attention than it does when the original artist posted it to begin with; that's not really a question. But is the reposting itself actually the reason why? Do people prefer, consciously or subconsciously, to view artwork through a third party than directly from its actual creator?
This thread in particular really hit home for me, personally: https://twitter.com/explodikid_/status/1773836237801185772
I don't think this kind of thinking applies to most media fans, but the sentiment definitely does exist within some of them (toxic gamers and AI bros, for instance, will outright say it to your face) and I could see a social media algorithm being designed in that spirit, to prioritize posts where users talk about "finding" art and saying stuff like "have you SEEN this???" in order to promote mindless media consumption by distancing users from media creation.
It would also explain something that I've been wondering about for years: maybe I've always struggled as an artist on social media because I just talk too much? ĀÆ_(ć)_/ĀÆ
If you've seen my posts on this forum, you already know this. ^^; I love to introduce my work, to explain it and analyze it and compare it to the work that inspired it...which is received very well on YouTube, where I've had most of my success. But on text-based/short-form platforms, it seems to just annoy or bore people more than anything. Even on Tumblr, where long text posts are normalized, I've started hiding my artist rants under 'Keep Reading' tabs just to hopefully give the art itself a fighting chance.
And if this phenomenon is a real thing, at least it would make it all make sense. Like, despite the fact that many people DO like to hear from creators and get insight on their thoughts...the majority are more comfortable with art as a simple stimulus that does not have an origin, or anyone's thoughts attached to it besides the viewer's own. Any artist who talks a lot and is undeniably involved in each and every piece they create is less desirable than an artist who silently churns out 'content' and pretends they don't exist...to the point where pretending to be someone who just "found" your own art might be the best promotional tactic at this stage of the game.
It's definitely still sad and depressing (especially if you add in the psychological dynamic about having skills and taking pride in your work vs. performing "humility" and diminishing yourself for a society that doesn't value the act of creation) but I'd rather know a depressing truth than be forced to guess about it forever. :T