3 ms·
I don't think it's quite fair to label it content-agnostic. I mean it sort of technically is, but practically it isn't. By pushing 'engagement' at all costs, i
by foerbert 5y ago
I don't think it's quite fair to label it content-agnostic. I mean it sort of technically is, but practically it isn't.
By pushing 'engagement' at all costs, it's essentially inevitable that all the terrible behaviors we see from 'content creators' happen. I agree that they are far from blameless, but when your entire platform is practically globally available to anybody and you only reward unsavory behavior... you're going to get unsavory behavior.
There could be many, many people behaving ethically, and most people may never even see any of them due to the way the platforms are set up.
It's technically content-agnostic in the most technical sense, but practically it's one big system designed to incentivize and surface unethical behavior.
- robertlagrant 5y ago> and you only reward unsavory behavior... you're going to get unsavory behavior They don't only reward that. They reward any engagement, and some content creators have raced to the bottom in terms of creating divisive content.
- CRConrad 5y agoSetting up an incentives structure for racing to the bottom is still more blameworthy than reacting to the incentives by racing to the bottom. It's a question of relative power: being in a position to even be able to set up incentives for others is inherently a position of power.
- robertlagrant 5y agoIt's not about power. Making cars doesn't mean you're responsible for people murdering other people with those cars, even though you're in a position to supply cars and they aren't. There is no power involved - no one is being coerced into behaving badly.