Perspectives and questions on the advent of cultural and information platforms 35 in the recent reactions to TikTok (FebruaryMarch 2023). • The considerable bias in the processing (name- ly due to the methods of data collection – their abundance in no way guarantees the validity and representativeness of the results obtained – and the successive choices left only to the experts). • In addition – third series of questions and criti- cisms – the regular and very systematic work of persuasion and conviction directed to consumers/users, about the supposed superiority of these methods of data collection of all kinds, highlighting the contribution of these same users-consumers. 4. Cultural and informative platforms: proposals for the analysis of their position(s) As indicated in the introduction, here and there, surveys and research work are ongoing, and some have already been completed. And journals with international influence begin to publish articles, most often related to strategies implemented in certain sectors or on partial aspects. We will stick here to the following three propositions: 1st proposition: the heterogeneity of situations: This is the conclusion in which two authors of a work focused on the issue insist: The place occupied by these platforms is far from being uniform in all territories and [...] does not extend in the same way to all cultural sectors. They cannot be understood as an undifferentiated whole, just as the strategies of cultural industry actors regarding the development of these platforms are notable for their heterogeneity (Thuilas & Wiart, 2023, p. 146). This results in the embarrassment already observed in the face of the very ambiguous term “platformization”, which
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjEzNzYz