Response in Social Media = S/Z

Roland Barthes wrote in his book S/Z (1970) about “Sarrasine,” which is a very old style, at times boring, short story by Balzac. The main plot in “Sarrasine” takes a long time to be presented to the reader, but it is nonetheless a very good story—if you read it, please, don't let the excessive naturalism intimidate you, just keep reading; it will get better. Barthes believes that readers can actually interact with a text that is not a major piece of literature. He calls the big, important texts “readerly” because the reader cannot change them anymore. In contrast, the reader can change a minor text by analyzing and writing about it. He called the minor literature texts, writerly. In my opinion, writerly equals collaboration and response in social media.

If everyday, we post a photo, a status, or a video and never engage on commenting on other people's photos, status, or video, then it is not social media. In other words, we have to act like Barthes suggested and analyze and re-write somebody else's discourse.And for that to happen, we also have to try to post something that is not perfect or almost perfect, because it may not get a response, even if it influences others. In other words, the best interaction in social media may come from a half-baked thought, a crazy photo, a video with a comment in which the plot or the ending is not given away, a question, and so on. I'm not calling for unfinished sentences, or unfinished blog posts, but rather for a an analysis plus a statement that will allow readers/followers/friends/contacts to keep the conversation going.

What do you think, does social media equal writerly?  Is every single status a writerly text?