.svg)
Is virality the new value?
A look at how platforms are changing the narrative walk into any gallery in 2025 and you'll be greeted with the same recognizable picture: individuals clustered around one work—not necessarily because it's the technically best, but because it's the one that they watched break the internet on Instagram. Criticism of art, which previously was restricted to journals and academia, now occurs in captions, tweets, and TikTok stitches. And whether you're a fan or critic, there's no doubt about it: social media is no longer sitting in the stands. It's authoring the new rulebook.
So the question is: is virality the new measure of value?
The Rise of the Democratized Critic
Those days when a few mainstream media critics dominated the discussion are gone. A no-body artist may now be boosted to global fame by a single viral tweet—or a thread may bring down a major retrospective. It is easier for all to become "opinionators", thanks to Instagram, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter). The gatekeepers do not have a monopoly for good or evil anymore.
That democratization has sown conversations that have been needed, and particularly regarding representation, access, and institutional critique. Marginalized voices silenced for so long from inheritance spaces are now being heard and heard loudly. And that is a positive thing.
There's a price to that pace and magnitude: context is lost. So is complexity. The slow simmer of thoughtful critique frequently gets overwhelmed by the algorithm's hunger for hot takes and soundbites.
Instagram-Worthy ≠ Artistically Worthy
We are now at the point where paintings are designed with share ability asa consideration—vibrant colors, enveloping installations, or optical illusions that photograph perfectly. It's no accident museum selfie rooms and mirrored rooms are on fire. The visual hook is now a part of the value proposition.
But that raises a larger conflict: are we producing and Celebrating work for the platform, or for the art itself? And how do we measure impact when visibility never necessarily translates to substance?
This is not a denunciation of visual spectacle—some of the most enduring work of the past decade was conceived in digital virality. But if attention is the ultimate measure, we risk losing that which makes criticism worthwhile: close thinking, historical context, and the capacity to sit with a work of art and not scroll past it.
New Platforms, New Language
One of the interesting aspects of social media's power is how it's reshaping the language of criticism itself. On TikTok, for instance, criticism appears at times as a form of storytelling—through comedy, personal experience, or even performance disassembling meaning. On Instagram, carousel posts or reels dissect shows in bite-sized, visually-described terms.
It is no longer "what does this mean?" but "how does it feel?" That emphasis on affect has opened the field wide. More people feel invited in. But what it also does is put art criticism in a place where vibe sometimes outpaces analyzing. The challenge is keeping room for both.
The Role of the Artist in the Feedback Loop
Artists now are navigating a new type of relationship with criticism—one that is public, instantaneous, and sometimes explosive. A work can be critiqued by dozens of individuals before a critic ever weighs in. That feedback loop is thrilling, or crippling, depending on the artist's relationship with exposure.
Some have welcomed it, even creating work that invites—or even requires—online audience interpretation. Others have remained largely in the offline sphere, maintaining the integrity of their work independent of public discourse. Neither is incorrect. But both suggest how thoroughly intertwined the artistic process is with audience understanding.
And let's be real: when criticism is no longer filtered through the prism of publication schedules and editorial gatekeeping, it's raw. Occasionally sublime, occasionally brutal.
Final Thought
Can Depth Be Saved in a Scroll Culture? Social media has irreversibly changed art criticism—and there's no going back. But that doesn't imply we need to sacrifice depth in favor of dopamine.
What we require today is equilibrium. Room for fresh voices and instant response, of course—but space too for quiet reflection, deliberate reading, and genuine dialogue. If we make virality the beginning point—instead of the endpoint—there's potential for something valuable.
Because criticism, fundamentally, is about engagement. About raising more questions. And about possessing the patience to know not just what we are seeing—but why it matters.
