It shifts the time spent going through and evaluating images away from the moments when they are being taken to the next day, which presumably is meant to help preserve the integrity of the experience being documented rather than burdening it with the self-awareness of how well it is coming across on the screen. The photos aren’t made “social” by posting them to a feed or snapping them directly to a person or group; instead their sociality is in how they behave as one part in a larger gallery of themed shots.

i dont think twitter lacks "complex discussions" because of its UX design, but because it's a deeply gamified platform that functions on metrics. only certain discussions are possible when everyone is keeping score https://t.co/MFFrw8FNHx— nathanjurgenson (@nathanjurgenson) February 18, 2019

Kunal’s thoughts on qualifying tweets outside your normal “realm” with “off topic” (the bookmarked tweet being an example). Don’t think it’s necessary at all, but also understand why people do it. If you know/believe that people are following you for a specific reason, then understandable [to] qualify it. Some people use Twitter to exist as full people—all things they are interested in and care about are fair game. Others are much more focused on a specific passion or something that aligns with their career. FWIW, I prefer the former kind of person in almost every case. The same drumbeat gets boring after a while.

excited to say i wrote a book about photography and social media! it's out with @VersoBooks in April and you can pre-order it now if you'd like: https://t.co/lD43PwRjJa pic.twitter.com/bmOt0U7R5W— nathanjurgenson (@nathanjurgenson) February 4, 2019