A corollary point to consider, as well, is the economic dimension of "keeping quiet." John Herrman of The Awl has written extensively on the subject of "platforms" and the "content economy," most recently here. The point of relevance for artists is that social media isn't really much more than a form of advertising imbued with a slightly greater sense of autonomy. So while "disappearance" creates PR risk in the current environment, it should also be understood as the default mode. (Have we gotten to the point where participating in social media is no longer a matter of opting in?)
The other things is that participating in social media, rather than contributing to a publication and having conversations there, or going to a live event, significantly reconfigures who owns what tranches of discourse. Herrman gets to this in the piece linked above:
If in five years I’m just watching NFL-endorsed ESPN clips through a syndication deal with a messaging app, and Vice is just an age-skewed Viacom with better audience data, and I’m looking up the same trivia on Genius instead of Wikipedia, and “publications” are just content agencies that solve temporary optimization issues for much larger platforms, what will have been point of the last twenty years of creating things for the web?
Or, stated differently, do the structural costs of the social web outweigh its benefits? Further, isn't this at a very basic level a matter of labor expectations and forms of economic assimilation for artists? And, finally, why do we equate social media with volume/loudness/extroversion, given that the burdens of producing a single Tweet are minimal compared to other forms of reactive expression, like a letter to the editor?
NB: I get that Herrman is talking about how "platforms" reconfigure the economic realities for publications, not individuals, but what he's referring to is publications tailoring their work for distribution on the social web, such that eyeballs/advertising dollars eventually fall under the indelible control of external entities. So the broader phenomenon at play is the same.