4 ms·
This ignores the algorithmic ordering of social media feeds, which was unique to Facebook and then widely copied by all the other ad-ridden socials. There was n
by rchaud 4y ago
This ignores the algorithmic ordering of social media feeds, which was unique to Facebook and then widely copied by all the other ad-ridden socials. There was no "connecting people" reason for them to do it, it was done because it made it easier to throw ads in to readers' feeds and make sure they'd be noticed.
- charcircuit 4y ago>There was no "connecting people" reason for them to do it Not all posts are equally important. If someone only has time to read 5 posts then they should see important life updates from their friends and what they are interested in and not just show you 5 posts from them same person about how much they enjoyed their dinner and how good it looked.
- rchaud 4y agoAbsolutely nothing about FB is optimized for the "I only have 5 minutes" user. The whole point is to be constantly scrolling because FB intentionally doesn't tell you what you may have missed.
- charcircuit 4y agoI disagree and would say that it optimizes for both. I have no issue in seeing the most important pests at the top of my feed. Of course I can keep scrolling and find interesting posts, but were those posts actually important for me to see? Not really.
- crabbone 4y agoThere's nothing exclusive about social media in this regard. Any Web application that could do that, tried to do that. Web search engines? -- didn't they try to tailor search results to your profile (or paid advertisement)? Retailers? -- didn't they try to suggest related goods based on your profile (or paid advertisement)? Everyone on the Web who used ads wanted to know your profile and wanted to manipulate the contents they provided to you based on it (and the wishes of those who pay for the ads). Again, the problem is not the social media. The problem is the Web.