4 ms·
How can you call twitter more authentic when it seems pretty clear (to me ofc) that their stupid length limit is ideally cut out to stir controversy and create
by gear54rus 5y ago
How can you call twitter more authentic when it seems pretty clear (to me ofc) that their stupid length limit is ideally cut out to stir controversy and create confrontation out of nowhere (by virtue of people assuming the worst when there's not enough info presented to them).
- cercatrova 5y agoDepends on who you follow. I follow people like patio11 or different startup founders, they have good thoughts and insights. I don't use it to follow random people who stir up drama.
- gear54rus 5y agoYou could say it depends for every platform. It's just some of them employ formats that are cancerous to begin with. Formats and patterns is pretty much the only things you can judge a social media site on since there's no real way to say that content is universally worse somewhere than other.
- Spooky23 5y agoIt’s easier to ignore bullshit on Twitter. With Facebook, unless you actively block lots of people, your high school buddy’s uncle will show up with some valuable information to share. With Twitter that crap is buried unless it hits some internet celebrity. Twitter is also less manipulative of the stream, while Facebook is focused on driving engagement. I just opened up Twitter, the top 5 items are SwiftOnSecurity, my city’s mayor chief of staff, my little league, and a post about Roman artifacts. 100% signal. Just opened up Facebook, and the top 5 are: somebody’s new curtains, a pitch to friend more people, an ad for noom, a colleague sharing his opinion about Texas abortion law, and a post from my favorite baseball team. 40% signal.