6 ms·
You can say that explicit curation and intention is the way things "should be" as much as you like, but all the evidence suggests that most people strongly pref
by s17n 5y ago
You can say that explicit curation and intention is the way things "should be" as much as you like, but all the evidence suggests that most people strongly prefer automated curation.
- mikem170 5y agoGiving users the option to toggle the algorithm on/off would be nice.
- ringworld 5y agoIt used to be that way. Then they started "forgetting" everyone's setting to turn it off (go back to the original reverse time based feed), then they took the option away. After purchasing Instagram they did the same exact thing, FB engineering specifically removed the feature on their platforms.
- munk-a 5y agoNot all automated curation is built equal and boiling it down to just one thing really confuses things. I absolutely adore YouTube's automated curation since the primary goal there is just to steer me to things I'll find interesting - the ads are present on all content and so YT just wants to keep me on the platform for as long as possible. When it comes to Facebook it always feels like I'm being steered towards topics that yield monetizable verbiage. If a friend likes an upcoming concert I'll definitely hear about it loud and clear - while as an upcoming picnic or personal project being planned is less likely to float to the top.
- bentcorner 5y agoI wonder how much wagging the dog FB has ended up doing to everyday activities? Do people give more weight to doing things that have a better opportunity for more FB engagement? (Thinking more on this I don't think FB is the sole culprit here)
- azinman2 5y agoYTs recommendations are infamous for getting people radicalized, into conspiracy theories, and filled with misinformation.
- munk-a 5y agoYT recommendations are always something I'm at least modestly interested in - even if I wouldn't know to independently search for. I think YT is following the model clearly demanded by current American ethics that suggests that the only thing worse than talking about what a nice guy hitler was is stopping someone else from talking about what a nice guy hitler was. I do think that at some point YT, FB and everyone else (google even!) will have to reckon with radicalization - but I still think that YT's recommendations are quite a bit more valuable than FB.
- Consultant32452 5y agoI'm highly skeptical of those claims. This seems mostly like wild claims from legacy media that doesn't want you to watch streaming video. Yes, I'm familiar with the relevant studies.
- cmorgan31 5y agoWhich legacy media is not making a streaming migration effort currently with enough sway to manipulate the narrative? I'm not aware of any major players not moving to svod or avod in the US.
- Consultant32452 5y agoAll you need to know is Youtube, one of the biggest and most popular streaming services with young people, is literally turning your children into Nazis.
- threeseed 5y agoIt literally happens to me every week. It's easy to tell that it's happening because you will see obscure, random news/opinions channels with high view counts. Something you can only get when you at some point have been promoted by Youtube.
- moron4hire 5y agoYT's curation keeps trying to shunt me off into neoconservative conspiracy theory videos, which I never click on, but occasionally auto play if I've left the window in the background. About all I can figure I've done is watch some videos about military-themed multiplayer video games. I don't actually play these games, but sometimes the commentary is funny. Facebook kept trying to sell me an Oculus Quest weeks after I had already bought one ("look at the metrics! 95% of people who saw the ad also bought the headset", "you're reading the graph backwards"). To me, it lays bare the myth of advertising analytics. All this data, all this tracking, and none of it is actually all that useful for the stated purpose. Makes one wonder if it's really all for fleecing advertisers or if it's to keep totalitarian regimes happy.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jaywalk 5y agoYou can go into your YouTube watch history and delete videos that you don't want influencing your recommendations. I do this all the time because if I watch something out of the ordinary, my recommendations will be bombarded with similar stuff that I don't want to see. I just wanted to see that one video with the dog doing funny things, damn it!
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- specialist 5y agoThe fiction of rational choice usually makes at least a performative nod towards informed consumers, actual choices, clear results, and consent. Which of those prerequistites does Facebook fulfill?
- tshaddox 5y agoI think the trouble is trying to have it both ways: excusing the existence of a curation algorithm because "people prefer it" [0] while also refusing to take all the responsibilities normally associated with a publisher who curates and delivers content. [0] Never mind the more obvious problem that "people prefer it" is not a great excuse for intentionally makinga product as addictive as possible.
- 345344f34f 5y agoGive them a choice to enable or turn it off then, like Twitter did. Debate OVER.
- coffeefirst 5y agoIt depends what you mean by “prefer.” I would prefer straight chronological even if I spend less time on it and click like fewer times.
- zepto 5y agoSmokers strongly prefer cigarettes.
- xg15 5y ago> all the evidence suggests that most people strongly prefer automated curation. What evidence would that be? I don't think having to actively force a feature on your audience is a good sign that they prefer it.
- s17n 5y agoPlatforms based on automated curation thriving while platforms based on manual curation wither. If Facebook gave people the opportunity to turn off the algorithmic feed, and they took it... they'd just spend all their time on TikTok instead.