It's very interesting to observe that mainstream media talks about #Mastodon describing it as a monholithic social platform.
They don't get the fact that in reality Mastodon is the sum of thousands independent social networks (the Instances) connected together and not a single, centralized platform with one unique identity.
Twitter and Facebook are giant Malls, each one with his own chairman, rules and style.
Mastodon instead is more like a network of independently run places, each one with his own identity, culture and chairmans, that collaborate together.
@vms20591 I think there are many reasons:
1) Most of the people are not very used to the idea of decentralized network (and journalists are people too)
2) Many news articles are written without extensive research, expecially tech news on mainstream media
3) Also if the journalist understoof the nature and potentiality of decentralization it's more easy to describe Mastodon as a single, centralized place
4) WE also tend to talk about Mastodon as a centralized place: I say to people that I am on 'Mastodon' but the truth is that I am on Bida (that's the name of my Instance) and Bida is connected with thousands of other Mastodon Instances. It's like saying that I use 'email' instead of a more precise 'Yahoo email'.
@Ca_Gi is it that they were unaware of the fact & went along with Mastodon banner? or, they just didn't want to complicate the news itself? Whatever the case is, when it comes to decentralized or p2p, it's better to be explicit & might help the audience in knowing the difference.