I've been speaking and writing lately about how tech companies try to shift the discussion on misinformation, polarization, harassment, etc., away from the systems and structures that are inherently toxic and toward questions of individual behavior.
This way they can blame their own users for any pathology and steer clear of calls for systemic change.
Today Elon Musk has come through with a perfect illustration for my future talks.
This should be obvious, but having an algorithm that behaves that way is a DELIBERATE CHOICE.
It would be easy enough, for example, to implement basic sentiment analysis so that the algorithm doesn't boost content that you have reacted negatively to in the future.
Musk is playing it both ways. He keeps the algorithm that boosts inflammatory content and drives the online conflicts that draw views and clicks, while pushing the blame for this off onto the individuals involved.
That sucks.
I've posted a slightly longer version of this thread to post.news. For those who are interested, here's the link. I've also attached the text below.
Elon Musk is following the playbook of many corporations, shift responsibility to consumers and individuals who have the least information or knowledge.
Social media companies such Meta and YouTube do this, even though their algorithms curate feeds of users.
Fossil fuel companies do this on climate change, while they lobby law makers and push false messages
Firearm companies do this while they ensure they are protected from basic consumer protection law.
Cigarette companies did this.
Sadly many libertarian groups have latched onto this lie
@ct_bergstrom probably why I do not see any of this. I weeded through my followers and who I followed in 2018. Got rid of those prone to posting anger inducing posts and retweeting crap that gets people upset...even if they were just retweeting to make people "aware."
Then focused on art and music follows...clicking on their posts and sharing if I really liked the content.
It makes for a better Twitter experience for me.
@ct_bergstrom agree completely.
Thing is, long before he took over Twitter, Musk talked about social media in a way that showed he had a clear understanding of these problems - the outrage machine dynamic, the way the algorithm is designed, etc. Now it seems like he’s defending it :-/
@ct_bergstrom lately I’ve been reminded of a Twitter discussion between Jack Dorsey and Musk about the latest tweets view (which I always use). They agreed that showing content only from accounts you’re following was a healthier model. They also talked about how taking Twitter private would make it easier to go in that direction.
Fast-forward to now, and the app defaults to the “For you” view every time I open it. I often forget that I have to swipe over to “Latest” 
@ct_bergstrom he clearly understands the dynamic, and advocated for people to use the “Latest” view back in May 2022, yet now they’ve removed the ability to default to, and stay on, “Latest”
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1525612988115320838?s=46&t=-gmScMCVfQWgIDdwjiklVQ
@ct_bergstrom "He keeps the algorithm..."
Perhaps it's other changes (reinstating formerly banned accounts) but Twitter feels like it has amplified this algorithmic choice.
@aminreport @ct_bergstrom Not only that - it isn't about people trashing an account, it's also people trying to tackle disinformation, blatantly dangerous political views and so on. And the people trying to do that end up swamped by more and more of the same. Try to stand up for your rights as a minority by replying to some racist/transphobic idiot, and you get swamped by more and more bullying idiots.
Quite clear Elon doesn't have a clue about any of these consequences, or willfully ignores..
@hambledown_road
That would explain it, and possibly a common trait among leaders of large platforms and countries. However, researchers can hardly talk about capability for empathy, and even when they do, it still does not explain how democratic societies have ended up short in the struggle to limit personal arbitrariness in social and political life and instead seem to reward and follow assholism. Well, maybe not all, perhaps in the EU they're making progress.
@ct_bergstrom
So my first thought was it was a good thing not to feed the trolls and perhaps people looking for conflict and confrontation would go away. But, thinking about it more, it means "silence is complicity". The images, the hate, the negativity, the disinformation, will continue to assault you.
So, if you don't like it and can't say anything about it - yeay, free speech?
@ct_bergstrom Reminds me of the disclosure that Facebook ranks reactions according to how irksome you find a given post. In sum:
😡 = "please, Sir, may I have another?"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/10/26/facebook-angry-emoji-algorithm/
He keeps the algorithm that boosts inflammatory content and drives the online conflicts that draw views
People go, “Haha. What a fool. He’s broken the world record for the largest loss of personal fortune in history.” They forget he is a very very cunning and calculative person. He knows that, “Good news does not sell.” Very well.
Yes! I'm stealing that line for an upcoming talk, if I may.
Or implement a dislike button.
𝕞𝕒𝕥𝕥𝕙𝕖𝕨 𝕣𝕖𝕚𝕟𝕓𝕠𝕝𝕕
Carl T. Bergstrom
FirefighterGeek 
Jody Schmid
John
HawthornFire 🏳️⚧️
shadownlite
Gail Parenti
Leisureguy
TuxPhones 
✅" alone is an UX eyesore
Mike Pozar
Jan I Am
hypervisible
דוח אמין | Reliable Report
Josh
Hambledown_Road
Jeff Miller (orange hatband)
Tim O'Connell
Sam 🐝
KitchenPirate
Mister Prickles 🦔
Alistair Davidson
JDinWC
Enema Cowboy
Deus
Abandoned America
myownpetard blue checkmark
M.S. Bellows, Jr.
Stijn Masschelein
Pär Björklund
Cassandrich
Kat O’Brien
Boris Barbour