I would argue that social media is not purely democratic, and that agenda setting can still play a role. The corporations, through their use of algorithms, play a major role in determining who sees what, and what content goes viral.

It is interesting how the employees tend to frame issues at the company in terms of gender roles, with a kind of determinist attitude -- "we have these problems bc it's what women do" -- rather than talking more constructively about the behavioral issues at play and how they could be improved, regardless of the gender of the employees or managers.

One of the most interesting aspects of communication as a field, to me, is that is a crucial component of all of the social science disciplines.

By not needing to worry about physical presentation, people can concentrate more fully on the dialogue of a text-only interaction. It makes sense that people would be less self-conscious and therefore have an easier time opening up in these situations.

It is interesting to use SPT to analyze reconnection of relationships in a parallel manner to new relationships. Social penetration occurring in this instance is essentially the idea of "catching up." But it needs to be reciprocal--if one person is willing to share new details about their life and the other isn't, social penetration and therefore reconnection is unlikely to occur.

The silent treatment is a shame-based communication style--"not only did you upset me, but you don't know why so I'm going to punish you by cutting off communication." For someone who deals with anxiety or insecure attachment issues, this is extremely triggering. I found this article validating because I think open communication ("when you do X, it makes me feel this way...") is always healthier and more constructive.

This is an interesting counterpoint, because as the "they say, I say" book points out, one of the main ways of entering the conversation in academic discourse is by disagreeing.