"valuing" art online

Got a last-minute invite from one of the panelists to the Meetup event below but didn't show up.

Social Media, Art & The "Like" Economy

How do we value art online? In a setting that privileges and rewards content with mass appeal and a meme-ready aesthetic, how does the creative practice of artists working on the internet conform to or defy these rules? In the absence of a true art market for net art, new media art, or art that takes place on social media platforms, does a work's viral potential become an indicator of success or quality?

In this moderated panel discussion we'll hear from artists, curators, and art critics who are looking at the way art functions in the digital gallery of the internet. We'll be exploring whether success online can translate to success offline, and exactly how much stock one should place in the "Like" economy of the web.

Let's answer the question in the first paragraph with a descending scale of priorities. Instead of art let's use the term expression and the term "art" as expression appreciated as art:
1. The expression generates interesting and cogent discussion.
2. It's recognized by an institution tasked with recognizing art.
3. It "goes viral" (but becomes "valuable" only when it leads to 1. or 2. above).
4. It acquires likes, faves, or other means of tabulating responses (but see 3. above).
5. Somewhere near the bottom: The expression is made by someone previously valued or validated as an artist (through the process of 1. and 2.)
6. Anything having to do with sales, the market, or money. In an ideal world that happens after a consensus is reached via 1.-5.)