medium-message-medium

The territory of content is ever expanding. Or wait did I mean context?

 Content:
“willing to accept something; satisfied” and “subject matter or topic in a written document”.

Context:
 “the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood.”
Mix these ^ with medium and message and you have yourself a statement. In fact, you have yourself a statement, just with medium.
The medium has a direct effect on the message.
Which medium is more effective? Kind of an interesting thing to monitor as I try and see which avenues instigate more attention. The photo, the words, the tweet, or the actual content that I'm putting out there. Do the tweets, pictures, mean more than the actual message in the first place?

For example, in the LDS interweb world, blurbs of talks are surfacing on Twitter, Pinterest, and Instagram. A quote or print type of a portion of a conference talk is generating mass views, likes, favorites and such. This line or quotation is more important and drawing more attention than the actual message, the talk. This Instagram photo of the Prophet's words is supposed to inspire people to go seek out the actual talk and read it in it's entirety (partly because sometimes the message can become skewed when the whole picture isn't painted) but I'm sure if they did some in-depth investigating they would see that most people just favorite the tweet rather than go seek the source and read the full text.This somewhat defeats the purpose of navigating people towards the source and it shortens the message, instead of textbooks and novels we want magazine articles and important quotes.We prefer a quick and short version rather than getting a full whole picture, and with that full picture, a well rounded understanding.