3 ms·
We used to call "reactionary" content sensationalism, and that type of content has always been predicated on fallacious arguments, but especially appeals to emo
by hackbinary 5y ago
We used to call "reactionary" content sensationalism, and that type of content has always been predicated on fallacious arguments, but especially appeals to emotion.
Facebook's algorithms seems very good at dectecting and pushing content that makes users have an emotional response.
They now have developed a feature where is someone or a page posts a comment to a page or group that I am not subscribed to, Facebook will push that content on to my feed.
It is just about the most annoying thing ever. I am profoundly not interested in people who I follow on what they post on Ted Cruz's Facebook page. Why is Facebook pushing Ted Cruz on to my feed if I am not subscribed to him? I want to see my friends posts, but not their responses to Ted.
Facebook sucks ass now, and I am going to convert over to mastidon or something.
- yurishimo 5y agoIt’s sucked for a long time. I quit over 5 years ago. I can only imagine how bad it is now. Algorithmic content is great when it shows us things we want to see, but by it’s very nature it can be exploited to show us that which we most despise in an attempt to increase engagement. I’m willing to go so far as to say the Algos in question are actually just optimized for engagement, not necessarily nefarious, but because we’re human, most people have an innate desire to make the world better in whatever way they can. Many believe discourse can help, but that’s obviously turned out to be flawed in the context of online conversation, where others can distance themself behind an online facade. As long as we are optimizing for engagement, I feel all social media is doomed to the same fate.