Today I’d like to touch on an area of media studies that interests me: how TV series can change the way we see life or support us through difficult periods. Yes, specifically TV series. I’m not going to talk about films today; that might become a separate post later.

I’d really like to know which series have had the strongest impact on people in the media studies community. In my view, the audience we have here is pretty discerning, in a good way, and very selective about what they watch, read, and write. I think you can see that quite clearly from what happens in this community.

By the way, the community has been growing noticeably over the last few weeks, and what I appreciate most is that the atmosphere has remained remarkably respectful and thoughtful. Even with very few technical restrictions in place, new members have been joining and participating without bringing much spam, conflict, or off-topic noise. To me, that says a lot about the culture we’re building here.

Anyway, back to the shows.

A couple of months ago, I wrote about what is currently my favorite series, Carnivàle:

https://www.reddit.com/r/mediastudies/s/PZeRUk2aMU

In that post, I described the context in which I watched it, and that context was pretty dark. I watched it during a period when things were very, very difficult for me both mentally and physically, and the series genuinely became a kind of support and point of reference that helped me get through that state.

Right now I’m rewatching The Booth at the End. In my opinion, it’s a very underrated and very deep series, one that makes you think about life, people’s actions and motivations, and, of course, your own. It makes you reconsider the reality around you.

Next on my list is Twin Peaks, but I’m not going to say much about it yet. I’ll only say that all three of these examples are connected by atmosphere. Yes, atmosphere specifically. I could probably describe it as an EXPERIENCE, or as something you enter into and live through as a state of mind. None of these shows are exactly light or fluffy. For some people, they might even feel very dark.

But in every one of them, no matter how difficult things become, no matter what kind of madness, chaos, or evil is happening around the characters, there is always some little café and a table where friends can sit together, have a cup of coffee, and share a piece of pie.

What are your favorite TV series, and why?

Just a couple of days after r/mediastudies turned 16, we reached another small milestone: 3,000 members.

https://preview.redd.it/iazxexuwfhrh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=88bceb1518704fdeb8477d0e4843540d46a6349e

Over the past several months, the community has grown not only in numbers. We’ve seen new people join, new projects appear, regular contributors emerge, and different perspectives on what Media Studies can be and what we can do here together.

So I don’t really think of this as 3,000 subscribers. It’s 3,000 people who, in one way or another, have chosen to be part of this community.

Thank you to everyone who posts, reads, shares their work, participates in discussions, or simply stops by from time to time.

Happy 3,000, r/mediastudies!

Anyone Can Take Photos — and Help Preserve Heritage and Memory

“Illustrating ancient monuments, monuments of antiquity, outstanding architectural structures, picturesque areas, landscapes, cities, and so on, which are of significance to the history of Ukraine, as well as to world culture, history, and science.”

— Charter of the Odesa Photographic Society, para. 2.2

First of all, I want to thank the Chairman of the Odesa Photographic Society, the initiator of its revival, Academician O. V. Maltsev — thanks to the revived Society, I have the opportunity to publish this article.

I did not think I would write it; I am not writing it because life is easy. Cutting down trees is not such a rare event. But oaks are a special matter. In the past, people tried not to cut them down without necessity: this tree was traditionally treated with special respect, and oaks also take a very long time to grow. Unfortunately, today this tradition is being violated more and more often, although the special attitude toward the oak itself still remains. And an old oak, especially in a city, is no longer simply a tree, but a kind of living monument: wherever it grows, it is always something significant. And just recently, something happened that forced me to speak: in Teremky, Kyiv, old oaks began to be cut down — at least several of them. Without going into details, they are trying to lay a heating pipeline there along a route through an old park which, according to tradition, was once part of the ancient Holosiivskyi Forest.

Sunset over Holosiivskyi Forest. View across the field. Kyiv.

And now a few words about myself and photography.

My personal passion is photographing old Oaks. I do not have an expensive camera, and to be precise, I do not have any camera at all :). However, I do not care about that. In essence, it has never stopped me from taking pictures of objects that interest me with whatever phone happened to be at hand.

Moreover, some of the photos of Kyiv oaks that I took and uploaded to Google Maps have already received tens of thousands of views and quite a few appreciative responses from people.

This, perhaps, is what I want to emphasize as the main point — this very idea is also embedded in the Charter of the Odesa Photographic Society. In my view, this does not simply show their beauty and grandeur, but also draws attention to the need for them to be protected.

There is a special procedure for granting outstanding trees protected status, and the more people know about their existence and the more attention this attracts, the easier it will be to protect them. Yes, of course, this does not provide a guarantee, but it strengthens the position — that is certain. Even if they are not yet officially protected, once people already know about them, it will be more difficult for someone to attack them.

“The Kashchenko Centuries-Old Oak” — a botanical natural monument of local significance. 40 Akademika Kashchenka Street, Kyiv. Estimated age — more than 600 years; the oak has a triple trunk.

A remark. While writing this article, I checked everything against Google Maps. Nine years ago, when I uploaded a photo of this oak there, an old sign with the nameless “Centuries-Old Oak” was hanging on it. And now! There is a new sign there, and the tree has acquired a name — “Kashchenko Centuries-Old Oak.” Over these years, the oak has received attention, and people have taken many new photographs. In my view, it did not receive its name without this attention.

For now, I will not go deeply into the history and legends of Holosiivskyi Forest and some of the ancient oak groves that are located — or, more precisely, were once located — in several districts of Kyiv and, according to beliefs and retellings, were considered sacred; I will simply note that they existed. Fortunately, some old specimens have survived.

For example, one of my favorite Oaks is Perun’s Oak, which is located in the Solomianskyi district. It is part of an ancient oak grove that stretched approximately from Shuliavka all the way to Batiieva Hora.

“Perun’s Oak” — a natural monument of local significance. 3 Henerala Hennadiia Vorobiova Street, Kyiv. Estimated age — more than 500 years.

By the way, several other interesting specimens have survived along this stretch, for example, the so-called Partisan Oak.

The Partisan Oak is a truly unique phenomenon. A simply fantastic story happened there. It grows in the middle of the road. Can you imagine? Yes, I am not joking.

According to the stories, when they were building the residential district there, an oak stood in the place where the road was supposed to be laid, and they decided to cut it down because houses had already been built on both sides. But local residents, who loved this tree very much, came out and stood in its defense: they surrounded it, joined hands, and would not let the builders through. Their resistance was so persistent that the project had to be redesigned and special signs and a curb installed around this oak. And now there is a narrow passage there, but the oak has remained alive and continues to delight and amuse everyone who passes by and sees a huge beautiful tree growing right in the road!

“Partisan Oak.” 21 Brativ Zerovykh Street, Kyiv.

Of course, I could talk about the forests and oak groves of Kyiv for a very long time, and about Holosiivskyi Forest probably endlessly) But that is not the point. Returning to the subject of photography, I want to say that if there is a desire — you can take pictures even with a brick)) And not simply take pictures, but preserve the memory of the grandeur and beauty of unique ancient trees and pass these photographs on to future generations.

This not only helps protect them and preserve memory, but future generations will also grow up with the stories that surround these ancient trees, and, in my view, this instills care, resilience, kindness, and determination in a person. That is precisely why I am sitting here at night writing this article.

These are my few words in defense of Oaks.

P.S. It turned out that this is still not the end. I managed to dig up several more photographs of young oak trees in the archives. I photographed one of them in Odesa, near the Monument to the Unknown Sailor and the Eternal Flame — I called it Baby Oak. And in Kyiv, in a park in Sviatoshyn, there is an oak planted in memory of a fallen Ukrainian soldier. This is another example of how the memory of a hero who gave his life defending Ukraine in the struggle against Russia’s military attack can be preserved.

Baby Oak. Odesa, near the Monument to the Unknown Sailor and the Eternal Flame — a memorial opened in 1960 in memory of the sailors who died during the defense of the city in 1941 and its liberation in 1944.

“Tykhyi’s Oak” in Mykhailo Reutskyi Park on Mykhaila Kotelnykova Street, Kyiv. The oak was grown in Bakhmut, where Hero of Ukraine Mykhailo Reutskyi, call sign “Tykhyi,” was killed on February 18, 2023.

V. H. Darahan

All photos by the author.

Today, September 22, r/mediastudies turns 16. 🥳

First of all, congratulations to everyone here, and thank you! To those who regularly post and participate in discussions, to those working on their own projects or finding people here to work with, and also to those who mostly just read. All of that is part of this community!

One thing I personally like about this subreddit is that it doesn't need to be loud all the time. Sometimes there is an active discussion, sometimes someone shares something they've been researching or working on, and sometimes people simply come here to read.

In a way, I think of it as a quiet library or common room — a place you can come to in the evening, write something, share an idea, have a conversation, or simply see what other people are thinking about.

And I think there is something nice about that.

It's also interesting to look back. Twelve years ago, people here were already discussing what Media Studies is, where it comes from, and what kind of field it is. You can still read that discussion here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/mediastudies/s/BgTYFJT26N

Twelve years later, we're still asking some of the same questions. The people have changed, media have changed, and the field itself continues to change, but the conversation is still going.

I haven't been able to find posts from the very earliest years of the subreddit. If anyone here remembers those years, knows who originally created r/mediastudies, or is still in contact with some of the people who were here at the beginning, it would be really interesting to hear from you — and perhaps invite them back to see that what they started 16 years ago is still here.

And finally, I'm curious:

What is r/mediastudies to you? What kind of place does it feel like? And as we turn 16, what would you like to see here in the years ahead?

Happy 16th birthday, r/mediastudies — and thank you to everyone who makes this place what it is. ❤️

What I find particularly interesting here is the broader question of participation in online communities.

The Evolution of Coordination in a Collective Intelligence System: 25 Years of English Wikipedia and the Emergence of Generative AI

The study shows that over the years, participation in coordination and governance spaces on Wikipedia has declined, while more of this work has become concentrated among a relatively small group of contributors. The authors also draw a comparison with Reddit, where mods perform a large amount of often invisible work.

This made me think about what I see on Reddit itself. My impression is that people used to interact with each other more actively. Long discussions, interaction between communities, and even interaction between moderators and members seem less common now. Of course, there may be many different reasons for this.

One of them may simply be exhaustion. Some people have been moderating communities for many years, and if they no longer have a strong personal interest in what they are building, it is easy to imagine them burning out. Especially in larger communities, moderation can require a significant amount of time, and eventually that can affect not only moderators themselves but the community around them.

But there is another side to this. People themselves do not always seem particularly interested in participating in the process of building a community.

I can see this even in r/mediastudies. We already have almost 3,000 members, and I regularly invite people to participate in discussions about what this community should become. I try to keep that process open and I write about it publicly. But relatively few people actually comment on these questions or express a position about how the community should develop.

At the same time, there is still a small group of people who are willing to speak up, participate, suggest something, or actually work on something. And perhaps that small group matters much more to the life of an online community than its total number of members would suggest.

And this brings me to another way of looking at what the study describes.

What I find interesting is that this may be part of a broader tendency. The Wikipedia study made me think about a parallel with Reddit — although Reddit itself is also mentioned in the paper — and I think similar dynamics can be observed across different platforms.

There are probably two ways of looking at this. One is to see the shrinking number of people doing coordination work as a problem. And there are obvious risks here. If someone takes responsibility for moderating a community, or for maintaining and coordinating work on Wikipedia, I think they need to find some kind of idea or purpose for themselves that does not simply end.

Because if there is no such idea behind the work, sooner or later there will probably come a point when the quality begins to decline. There has to be some answer to the question: why do I continue doing this?

This is particularly important on Reddit and Wikipedia, where people are generally not financially compensated for this work. But personally, I don’t think financial compensation alone would solve the problem either. It might even introduce conflicts of interest and create entirely new problems.

So there is another way of looking at what is happening. Perhaps we are seeing not simply a decline, but a change in the form in which this kind of work and these relationships exist. I think relatively small groups of people are now capable of solving quite complicated problems. We have far more tools, assistants and technical possibilities than we had before, allowing fewer people to accomplish more work in shorter periods of time.

From this perspective, the dynamic described in the study does not necessarily have to be understood as something bad. It may also represent a restructuring of the space in which people collaborate and maintain communities.

I actually didn’t notice this panic in the media right away, but only a couple of days after that statement about a 10% probability was thrown out there.

It surprised me to some extent because the statement came from a fairly serious person. But as it turned out, Evan Hubinger, Anthropic’s Alignment Science lead, explicitly described the number as his personal estimate:

“We really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans! I personally think it is >10% within the next decade.”

He later clarified that he considers the risk from present models low, and that his concern is about future superintelligence arising from recursive self-improvement.

Recently, u/HobbesNik and I had a very interesting discussion about this in his post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/FreeYourFeed/s/Fjo0703aWL

In general, this topic is absolutely nothing new, and my post isn’t really about that. It’s about the fact that the panic that the media are trying to stir up today is very weakly supported. None of this is new, and professionals have been discussing these issues for decades. Safety specialists continue doing their work as usual.

Anyway, I don’t want to do a deep analysis right now. It’s just an interesting case of how one statement, taken out of context, can turn into a tornado.

And today I came across this video. I think it demonstrates quite well what that tornado can look like once the message has traveled through the media environment and reached a much wider public.

But a tornado is a temporary phenomenon. I think this one will die down soon.

---

This post includes a short sample of the original video for the purposes of criticism, commentary, research, and education. The sample is used solely to support discussion and analysis. All rights to the original material remain with the respective copyright owner(s).

Greetings,

a little context: I tried several times to make rules for reposts, but as it turned out, nobody read the rules and nobody added context explaining why they were making a repost to our subreddit. About a month ago, we disabled reposts entirely because of mass spam without any context.

Members of our subreddit supported the idea.

But since the new Rules Hub tool has now appeared and our community participates in the beta testing program for early features, we now have the opportunity to establish this as a clear rule:

Reposts must include context

Reposts from other Reddit communities must include at least 50 words of original context explaining why the post is relevant to r/mediastudies. This can include your interpretation, additional context, or a specific question for discussion. Reposts without the required context may be removed.

That is, reposts without context, according to the rule, should be removed/sent to me for review so that we can keep our feed in order.

I plan to enable this as a test for 1–2 months and see how it goes. (may shut down if not working properly etc)

Why this is needed at all: this is good in terms of bringing in new relevant participants and creating discussions, since Reddit may recommend our subreddit to users as a relevant community when they are reposting content.

Of course, I understand that there may also be some that are not entirely relevant, and I will keep an eye on this. btw if something go wrong I will shut down reposts again immediately. It's just a test, let's see how it goes.

Please write in the comments if you are against or support this and provide your arguments.

If the community is strongly against it, I will disable them again.

Greetings to all members of the mediastudies community,

As I promised in the previous post, together with you we are beginning to work on forming the description and Wiki of our community. I have been very careful with this, and since the moment I became a moderator about four months ago, I have not made a single change to the description or Wiki (I remind you that our community is the oldest Media Studies community on Reddit, it was created by people more than 12 years ago, and I am grateful to them for the opportunity to continue what they started together with you). This was a conscious choice because all this time I have been observing how the members themselves form its culture and understanding of Media Studies, both new researchers and people with academic degrees — there is a place for everyone in our community, no one stands higher or lower, the voice of every person is important to us.

As I have repeatedly said before, my personal vision of Media Studies is that this field is not only theory and philosophy, but an interdisciplinary field that has an applied aspect — I will emphasize once again, specifically an applied character that can influence the reality around us.

And over the last few days I decided to look into how academics and universities define Media Studies. Of course, we fundamentally rely on science, especially its applied aspect.

And here is what I saw:

UC Berkeley

“Our emphasis in this major is historical and theoretical, arising from a liberal arts tradition.”

“We are largely concerned with promoting an understanding of the origins of contemporary media and helping students assess the roles and impact of the major mass media on contemporary life, rather than with developing specific media production skills.”

“Ours is a discipline that weds traditions from communication, anthropology, sociology, political science, and journalism with contemporary critical and cultural studies theory to examine media technologies, institutions, economics, as well as media content and audiences.”

UC Berkeley — About Media Studies

University of Colorado Boulder

“The media studies degrees span traditional boundaries between theory and practice.”

“Media studies draws from humanistic, social scientific and multimodal approaches.”

“Research and media production projects engage emerging technologies and digital cultures…”

“…and seek to change society in meaningful ways.”

University of Colorado Boulder — Media Studies

University of Alabama at Birmingham

“The Media Studies minor is an interdisciplinary program for students interested in learning the theory and production practices of new media technology.”

“Students also engage in community-based research…”

“The program emphasizes applied research techniques…”

“…experiential learning…”

“…hands-on participation in local communities.”

University of Alabama at Birmingham — Media Studies

Observing r/mediastudies over the last four months, I see that our community is naturally moving toward a combination of these approaches. What stands out most to me is the practical character of what happens here. We ask what can be done with what we learn and understand — what can be changed, tested, improved, created, or developed further. Research can become a project, discussion can become collaboration, criticism can lead to action, and knowledge can become something that directly influences the reality around us.

And this brings us back to the description of our community.

I would like to propose a new description for your consideration — one that reflects what is actually happening here and what the people inside this community have already begun to create through their posts, research, discussions, projects, criticism, and collaboration.

But I don't want this description to be simply my decision as a moderator. This is our community, and I would like to hear what you think. You can support the proposed description with an upvote, leave your thoughts in the comments, or, if you see it differently, suggest what you think should be changed. I will take your suggestions into account.

Once we discuss the description and I update it taking your suggestions into account, it can become the foundation for the next step — creating our Wiki, where together we can describe the philosophy of the community in more detail.

Proposed community description

An interdisciplinary community for the study of media through research, practice, discussion, and collaboration.

I’ll be honest with you: after all the work we’ve done, I’m sitting here and laughing a little at this. In a good way, of course — just thinking about how much it took to arrive at this small phrase.

But this is not a bug or a mistake. It is an expression, a kind of concentrate, behind which stands a precise and multifaceted explanation of the essence of what is happening in our community. And this essence was created by every member of it. This is our shared achievement.

I’d really like to hear what you think. Leave your thoughts in the comments — whether you agree with this description or think something should be changed.

In my view, this is, to some extent, a PR move, although in this case my personal view somehow aligns with the position of the U.S. administration and Donald Trump.

What is happening now in the UK—and not just this particular incident, but also other measures aimed largely not at educating people, particularly children, and/or attempts to portray these measures as beneficial—shows, through numerous incidents, the dynamics of attempts at censorship and pressure on free expression and freedom of speech and thought in the broadest sense of the word.

In my view, the fact that the media is now forced to come to my platforms—and specifically Reddit—is a positive development: they are becoming equal participants just like any other person, and this dynamic has had a very positive (although there are certainly downsides in terms of the spread of misinformation—though the media often suffers from this as well) on the growth of independent journalism. And if a person knows how to analyze information independently, even some of the noise generated by social media won’t hinder them—it’s actually quite helpful.

Screenshot/source: The Guardian — Michael Savage, 7 September 2026.

Hey community, how are you doing 😁

A little update: now we have editable flairs in our sub so you may want to put something special under your nickname.

if you need any support or have any questions feel free to reach me!

also if you have any ideas or suggestions for the community please share or we may create a separate post if you want to share something bigger.

ps sub is still open for new moderators.

In April 2026, The Maltese Herald published an article claiming that Bank of Valletta is the Maltese bank most exposed to risky clients — a conclusion reached by running the outlet's own archive of articles through two AI chatbots.

There's a frequently asked question — debates come up about whether using AI tools is actually useful in journalists' work. A great deal has already been said about this, both for and against. The main arguments in favor are that it takes the technical load off the person — say, searching, and fact-checking — while responsibility for making decisions always stays with the human. That's one of the core theses the defenders of this approach put forward. Opponents argue — and I think this is exactly where, in my view, opponents say that the person is offloading responsibility onto the tool. And this article is a vivid example of how the use of a tool leads to the conclusions turning out to be unreliable.

On 16 April 2026, The Maltese Herald published a striking conclusion: Bank of Valletta is the Maltese bank most exposed to risky clients. The claim was presented with unusual certainty — BOV came first "unequivocally and by a very wide margin."

But the method behind that conclusion measures something different.

In the article, first of all, nothing is said about which chatbots were used — that's unclear. But the most important thing is that, statistically, if we look at it — if we read this article, well, not the article, but if we analyze this outlet's materials — we'll see that they are analyzing what they themselves wrote. So it turns out that the more they write, the better the statistical result they get from the analysis. Mark Camilleri ran The Maltese Herald's own articles through two chatbots. That can tell us which banks appear most often in The Maltese Herald. It cannot, by itself, tell us which bank actually carries the greatest financial or compliance risk. If one newsroom has written far more stories about BOV than about competing banks, then BOV will naturally dominate an analysis of that newsroom's archive. Essentially, for this you wouldn't need to use any chatbots at all — you could just do a count, make a sample.

So in this case the argument isn't just weak — it's, well, not viable. That said, in any case this doesn't cancel out the fact that this bank did have problems, and there's confirmation of that too. This doesn't mean the criticism of BOV is invented. The bank has faced genuine compliance problems: in 2021, Malta's Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit fined BOV €2.6 million over deficiencies involving beneficial ownership information for thousands of corporate customers.

It doesn't mean the bank isn't at fault.

In this case what we see is that the very method of analysis is the problem.

Analysing a newsroom's own archive with two chatbots doesn't establish which bank in Malta is objectively "most exposed to risky clients" — it establishes which bank appears most often in that newsroom's coverage.

And that's precisely the pattern in stories like this: when a person hands responsibility over to artificial intelligence, it really does harm.

Screenshot from Carnivàle (HBO, 2003–2005). © Home Box Office. Used under fair use for analysis and discussion.

Today, I’d like to share something unusual with you. It’s something that happened to me only once and has never recurred. I am talking about watching the series Carnivàle.

What happened goes beyond the bounds of ordinary perception; it was a rather strange phenomenon. Then again, the show itself is strange, too.

I first watched it about ten years ago, and it was an incredible experience—truly an experience. It felt as though I had completely immersed myself in that atmosphere: languid, viscous, sickeningly sweet, and incredibly honest. No, wait... that’s not quite the right word. It wasn’t just an atmosphere I encountered; I lived through the experience of inhabiting the world its creators had built.

People usually say that a particular work influenced their worldview, impressed them, or moved them. But my story is different. It simply stayed with me. It settled quietly and calmly somewhere very, very deep inside—in the quietest, most secluded corner of my memory.

Years went by, and I completely forgot about the existence of that series. I forgot it entirely. Then, suddenly, I ran into difficulties in life. Hard times hit, and circumstances were such that I had no opportunity to interact with real people for a long time. For several years, I lived alone in my apartment, communicating with others solely via the Internet. And at one point, things became truly difficult for me. Unbearably difficult.

And then, suddenly—its rusty wheels creaking against the backdrop of the anxiety and weariness that had entered my life—a van appeared. Yes, you guessed right. I remembered that TV series. I don’t know why, but its title suddenly surfaced from the depths of my memory. I can’t even explain why that particular one came to mind. But in that moment, I felt as though someone had very quietly reminded me: there is a place I had visited once before. And then I realized—not all was lost.

And that’s where something very unusual happened. I didn’t remember a single scene. I couldn’t have retold the plot. I barely remembered the characters. Yet, I remembered with absolute clarity what it was like to live in that world. It was the atmosphere—the state of being—that mattered most. And I was truly surprised. It was as if I could describe the very essence of that world down to the smallest detail, without needing to recall the plot at all.

What was also strange was that I didn’t quite understand why I should watch it again. After all, I didn’t remember the plot. Reviews had described it as bleak, and I’d been advised against watching it given the state of mind I was in.

And I defied expectations. I listened to the rusty creak of the wagon wheels carrying ordinary people. There were no saints among them—only lost souls, sinners, bandits, prostitutes, the crippled, and the outcasts whom the rest of the world had turned its back on. Except for the members of the carnival. It wasn't just a troupe; it was a family.

Yes, I watched it again. And upon rewatching, I was able to perceive the incredible depth the creators had infused into it. But that’s not all. Most importantly, I suddenly realized that all these people—with their troubled lives and their sins—were the most honest of them all.

I could go on at length. But to sum it up: I have never had an experience quite like Carnivàle, and I am not sure I ever will again.

At the same time, I would like to emphasize one important point. This was not an attempt to hide from reality. Quite the opposite. It was precisely after rewatching it that I managed to gradually emerge from the state of despondency I had been in for the past few months.

I still find it strange that one can forget almost the entire work—and yet remember it in its entirety. Not the plot. Not the characters. But the very way that world exists.

Have you ever experienced anything like that? Is there a film or series that left you remembering not a story, but a state of being?

Context: I am a community moderator, and I use the Reddit AI summary tool to get an idea of ​​the person behind a post in my community (this is the feature where you click on a user's avatar in the feed to see a summary of their profile—I’ll show you what it looks like using my own account; there's a screenshot you see above).

However, a situation arose yesterday where a new user joined our community, and when I tried to use the tool, nothing was displayed.

This is the first time I’ve encountered a situation like this, so I reached out to the official moderator support community for help; as it turned out, other moderators had also faced similar situations.

Based on their opinions and observations, the absence of an AI summary is caused by the user having been inactive on the platform for some time or having low recent activity:

For example, in my specific case, the user’s status at the time this situation arose was as follows:

Recent account activity:

Latest posts: 19 minutes ago and 1 day ago.

Before that, the previous activity was 3 months ago and 4 months ago.

I'd like to point out that this isn't a newbie: at first, I thought this was a new user, but no, the account is 3+ years old and has a post karma of 600+ and a comment karma of 100+. So I assume that's not a reason.

So, I'd like to ask the administration to consider adding the ability to receive such AI summaries for users who haven't been active for a while. For me as a moderator, this is important. The fact that there hasn't been any activity for a while isn't a problem. The main thing is that there's a history of their activity on the platform, which helps with community management and makes work more convenient and efficient, because I don't always have to spend time independently studying their profile.

I would like to suggest that the AI summary look something like this (or whatever the admins think is best):

>!low recent activity, but 3 months ago user... etc.!<

I'd also like to point out that another moderator also encountered this and supported the idea. I'm reaching out to other moderators and admins for feedback.

What do you think of this proposal? Would it be useful for your work?