In this editorial for WPCC’s ‘Viral Media’ issue the author asks whether the metaphor of viral media has held up well since it was coined. Considering the debate she suggests a clear distinction – notwithstanding the major role of technology – of viral media, when compared to biological viruses, which is the role of emotions in driving virality. This is what ‘distinguishes the biological “virus” from its psychologically driven communication counterpart’. ‘Viral’ is indeed an ‘imperfect term for rapid spread of information’ but viral media items still have the potential to deliver ‘progressive ideas’. This editorial notes how the contents of the issue plays host to a variety of fresh perspectives in its themes such as corrupted play, journalistic choice, viral politics, voice and nostalgia. It also notes, referring to the issue’s interview with Kishonna Gray, the dangers of platforms simply standing aside to allow toxic viral messaging and racism. It may be impossible to counter ‘morally ambivalent’ memes with regulatory or any other kind of ‘vaccines’ though it might, the author concludes, ‘be reasonable to limit the expanse of the viral flows and to question the algorithmic patterns of digital platforms’ even as memes’ popularity and resistance to total marketing control preserve their continuing (if somewhat tarnished) reputation as a ‘digital darling’.

中文翻译：

---

如何为媒体研究定义“病毒式”？

在WPCC的“病毒媒体”专刊的社论中，作者问自病毒媒体的隐喻自产生以来是否一直保持良好。考虑到辩论，她提出，尽管与生物病毒相比，尽管病毒在技术上起着主要作用，但与生物病毒相比，病毒媒介具有明显的区别，那就是情感在推动病毒传播方面的作用。这就是“将生物学的“病毒”与心理驱动的交流对象区分开来”。“病毒式”确实是“信息快速传播的不完善术语”，但病毒式媒体项目仍具有传递“进步思想”的潜力。这篇社论指出，该刊物的内容在其主题中如何发挥出崭新的视角，例如腐败的戏剧，新闻工作者的选择，病毒式政治，声音和怀旧之情。它还指出，提到该问题在接受Kishonna Gray采访时，平台仅仅站在一边以允许有毒的病毒信息和种族主义的危险。作者总结说，尽管可能通过监管或任何其他形式的“疫苗”来对抗“道德上模棱两可”的模因，但结论是，“限制病毒传播的范围并质疑数字平台的算法模式是合理的”尽管模因的受欢迎程度和对总体营销控制的抵制仍然保持了它们作为“数字宠儿”的持续声誉（即使有些失落）。