Heads up, eyes front.
This post is up a bit sooner than I originally wanted, but I found an article that's a worthwhile read, especially for its ties to news feeds.
It's more entertaining to fanfic events in ways like 'fortuitous censure from on high' (me playing, not the linked article) rather than simply saying "it was distillers' grains;" however, to whom will it matter that an event was marked with falling pre-booze once the earliest assumption has spread and taken root? To connect to the article, it sounds rather like the sort of distortion that's happened with 'pass it to know what's in it' and that thing about aquarium treatment. (Tangent - I had a question earlier about networks' cable ratings in comparison with other ways to access their broadcasts. Interesting sets of numbers, these, and keeping a weather eye out for further news.)
There's also the part of the article that speaks of echo chambers; notable to me is the illustration with the helium balloons and the toy brick, and the text just beneath it. It stirs the memory of a questionable study (well more than a toe past the line at this point) and of those "For You" screenshots I keep on hand (I may understand certain characteristics of an article have more to do with its subject than with the reader to whom it's recommended, but when those characteristics keep repeating, I keep an awareness of how cosmetic is the removal of the label).
Then again, when there are those more experienced writing with a more informed take on the matter, who am I to point these things out?
Weather eye with this article and, in the context of vocab 芬兰, 瑞典, a question on preventing expansion: how's that going?
Ending with this because aww.