As a person who can find the positive in all sides, I am indecisive in the debate of whether these big platforms are helping bring people together or forcing us to communicate less.

“At a very high level, platforms simply allow people to reach and connect with one another” (22). I understand this quote, and I can apply it to a platform like Facebook in a positive light, that it has allowed for international communication that could otherwise not be possible. I can connect with people that I met in Europe very easily. People with the same last name as I that live in Italy have reached out to me in the past in efforts to communicate. While this is all well and good, it has equally provided a source of miscommunication as people check their Facebooks via their smartphones while in the physical company of other humans, aimlessly scrolling through their newsfeed, refraining from indulging in conversation or other humanly interactions.

The reading discussed using ‘can’ versus ‘must’ when talking about the usage of these platforms, which I found interesting to think about. Consumers have the choice to use these platforms, they are not forced into them.. but are we? I recently just read the post by a peer that the Textbook annex is being forced out and is automatically signing students up for Amazon Prime. Some media classes force us to use big platforms (Twitter). I can foresee that even resumes will become void as more and more companies rely on LinkedIn. So I think in a way we are subconsciously being forced into these platforms. Yes, we do have the choice to use them and I know people without Facebook, but they are not completely unplugged from the gang of four. One of these platforms is utilized. Also we are just taught that this is the easiest way of doing things. The idea of the negative and dangerous effects are not learned or discussed, so I do not think we really are given a choice to refrain from using them.

“We consumers don’t have to buy anything on Amazon, much less everything” (28).

My thoughts on monopolies:

“The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines a monopoly as ‘the exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action” (30).

Market dominance and product process dominance is where I feel uncomfortable. I think dominance is the key word here, I’m not the biggest fan of any sort of dominance applied to mostly anything.

I know the reading explains that platforms are not monopolies given pricing power, competition factors, elastic demand, etc. That platforms are not aiming to become monopolies, but I still do not agree with a soul company eating up other other companies by buying them out. This means that they control so much of the cash flows of the economy and that doesn’t sit right with me. It’s economically unsustainable and makes the gang of four too powerful in that sense. It makes me feel like consumers no longer even have a choice of where they are investing their money.

I guess what it comes down to is the unsettling feeling of not wanting the world to completely switch over to a virtual world despite the convenience. Nothing ever translates well through text and virtual communication. Emotion is somewhat lost and I think that is an important piece to humanity. So while Amazon and platforms like it are pushing out bookstores, society will continue to lose out on human interaction and build stronger and stronger relationships with their technology screens and website faces.