It gets used online for things, and there are whole communities devoted to shitposting, but I can’t find a clear set of rules for something to count as a shitpost. I remember querying whether a post on a shitposting community was witty enough to be a shitpost rather than just a shitty post, but of course not all the responses to that were terribly helpful!
A meme or post that has no deeper meaning. If you have to analyze it or think about it, you’re already past a shitpost. The point of a shitpost is the stupidity of its superficial, useless, low-quality humor
It’s possible to have a high-quality, high-effort shitpost, but it’s rare, since by nature, high effort posts tend to also be meaningful. In my eyes, this is peak high effort shitpost
That shitpost in indeed 🧑🍳 😘
I like this explenation
A shitpost is something low effort, that simply takes up space in the content feed without being engaging, entertaining, or interesting.
One of the primary forms of shitpost is a meme or joke that isn’t very funny, or has been reposted to death. So “shitposting” can refer to the act of spamming shitty meme posts.
Thanks for asking this, OP. I’ve been wondering this same thing for awhile with no real results when I search.
I love this kind of thing and appreciate the humor. I don’t think it’s something that would come to me easily if I were to create one on my own, however.
But thank you for the illustration, it is helpful and made me smile :)
I think of it as low effort but still has some slight potential to get a few laughs or start a conversation.
It’s posts that are a step up from piss-posting, but below regular unmodified posting.
I know it’s a 45 minute Youtube video, but I love Tom Nicholas and all his stuff is fascinating and worth watching. Check this out as he does a sincere deep dive on it to get an honest answer and it’s pretty enlightening! It’s actually evolved even in the short time since its inception on the internet.
Its an opinion that the author wants to write off as a joke /s maybe sorta not really.
It’s scientifically defined (Woods, 2023).
https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.2023.2272988
I propose a definition of shitposting that embodies four distinct elements: a reliance on absurdity or “meaninglessness,” the critique or disruption of online discourses, the employment of an “internet ugly” aesthetic, and the use of meta-languaging.
Meaninglessness/absurdity - There’s no intrinsic meaning in the content, but there is in said content’s circulation. Shitposts “mock”, “denigrate”, “construct an image of authenticity”, and “accrue social capital” (he probably means upvotes or Discord reactions)
Disruption - It can be used politically, e.g. the alt-right drowning out opponents, or just plain derailment, using “ironic references… to confound commentary or analysis” (he uses a Twitter example in the article – i.e. among the “Here’s what I did today!” there’s a Jon Arbuckle of in of out, and it disrupts your train of thought)
Internet ugly aesthetic - Kinda obvious. Motion blur on a plastic bag sort of stuff. But he diagnoses an internet-queasiness I didn’t know I had: “[shitposting] provides a critique of the overly streamlined information ecosystem of the internet… an imposition of messy humanity… on smooth gradients, blemish correcting Photoshop, and AutoCorrect”
Meta-languaging - Well, memes evolve. It’s part of their meaningless-content meaningful-use interaction. Like a meme with a random Subway sandwich on it, obviously insanely edited over repeatedly.
Actually a really interesting read. The man quotes dril and talks about how he started a small movement where “corncobbing” was an insult.
Thank you for this.
