Ann LiptonJul 26, 2023

Can someone who understands the economics better than I do explain why nudging users to "For You" instead of following is somehow a better business model for these services? I mean, I assume that's the explanation.

https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/25/23807340/threads-following-feed-for-you-default-instagram-meta

You can’t just leave Threads in the Following feed

The brand-new Following feed in Meta’s Threads won’t always stick around if it’s your preferred way to use the app. Every so often, the app will open up on the algorithmic “For You” feed, even if you were browsing the Following feed.

The Verge
Show threadRandahl FinkJul 26, 2023

@annmlipton when we choose to follow somebody, it is a very conscious decision. However, when we consume content, we are less conscious of our choices.

YouTube, Facebook and others have realized, if we only see content we have deliberately subscribed to, we may or may not see content that keeps us on the platform.

1/2 (…)

Show threadRandahl FinkJul 26, 2023

@annmlipton However, when we see content they have selected for us using an algorithm, they can serve all the stupid, easily digestible, popular content, which we would never consciously subscribe to, but which we are prone to click on when it is available.

The result is, we spend more time consuming content, and they make more money, and the entire world spends more energy and time on stupid content consumption.

This is why I am on Mastodon and not spending my days on Twitter.

2/2

Show threadAnn Lipton
@randahl So it's just they think it'll mean more time spent? I mean I get that as a default but it seems strange to continually force on people who don't want it. Like, for me personally, it's a great way to get me to spend less time bc I find nonchron to be very off-putting.
Jul 26, 2023 at 8:45amWeb
Show threadRandahl FinkJul 26, 2023

@annmlipton you and I may find the algorithm annoying, but their statistics show that it works on people in general. It does lead to more content consumption — otherwise they would not do it.

In their favor, I will say that on YouTube the algorithm has actually helped me find a lot of useful content I would have missed, if the algorithm did not control my feed.

1/2 (…)

Show threadRandahl FinkJul 26, 2023

@annmlipton For instance, if I am watching videos about gardening, YouTube finds more on that topic including videos from people I do not subscribe to.

However, the annoying part is, the algorithm also finds really stupid content which it thinks I want, just because many consumers have watched it.

2/2

Show threadAnn LiptonJul 26, 2023
@randahl Yeah I buy that it keeps most people around longer. Just seems so strange that they wouldn't at least want to capture the market of people who dislike it by allowing chron as a choice. Bc I'm not on Threads and I wouldn't even consider it until there's a functional chron feed.
Show threadRandahl FinkJul 26, 2023

@annmlipton I feel exactly the same. But we the minority do not matter to the business, if the algorithm makes the vast majority double their content consumption.

To allow chronological consumption takes true idealism. Former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey had it. Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg does not.

Until our politicians enforce better Social Media policies our best option is to choose Mastodon over the algorithmic SoMe platforms.

I just realized I should make a video about this. So thanks.

Show threadijo StellaJul 27, 2023
@randahl @annmlipton i mostly like the recommendation feed on youtube, but the sub feed is still essential for me using the app. if i only had the rec feed, i would not use youtube
Show threadLouis IngenthronJul 26, 2023
@annmlipton @randahl On the contrary, they've done internal studies that show people prefer the recommended content (they scroll slower on the recommended feed than they do on the chronological feed)
https://www.techdirt.com/2021/10/27/when-facebook-turned-off-news-feed-algorithm-it-made-everyones-experience-worse-made-facebook-more-money/