The earlier described online reading protocol requires a reconceptualization of online information design. This design is applied to deliver information in order to guide the interpretation and ‘’enhance our understanding of the non-statically aspects of the past, present or future’’ (Katz 2012). When realising information design for a specific purpose, literacies are used to deliberately imply meaning. This could mean that the content is purely meant to convey a specific message, in order to share and promote personal capital. Due to our need to increase this personal social capital, companies incite us to read and share content and in so create a lucrative market through our online visibility addiction. This shows the promotional properties that literacies contain, enabling messages to be meaningless beyond its promotional purpose. It means that the truthfulness of the shared content is sub-ordinary to the promotional value for social capital.
Therefore, online literacies can affect the way users communicate with their social network. Sharing gives you online visibility, regardless of the content shared. However, by sharing, the content becomes (your own personal version of the) truth, stating who you are and what kind of literacies you believe to understand, unless you share false information, which is done for the purpose of sharing its content as a fake. Thereby, we increase our knowledge identity with useless and sometimes even misleading information. This might discredit the user socially and in so declines his/hers social capital. Social capital is defined here as: the membership of a group or a network of relationships that provide members with a capital or credential specific to that group (Bourdieu, 1986). From this definition, one might understand how digitally sharing ‘incorrect’ content might harm that person’s capital, or in other works the position in the group.