3 ms·

I disagree. They are focusing on empowering creators but are also pointing out their weaknesses with the non-creator experience. Non-creators are arguably more

I disagree. They are focusing on empowering creators but are also pointing out their weaknesses with the non-creator experience. Non-creators are arguably more important to the success of a social media brand. I think of Mixr as a great sample of that. They signed the 2 biggest streamers (creators) and it still failed because the viewers (non-creators) didn’t follow.

TeMPOraL 3y ago
It's the same pressure though. They want creators to push out more content to wider audiences, and they want non-creators to consume more content. As a random non-creator, you either fall into their trap, or they'll try to push you in through all kinds of psychological trickery, both subtle and blunt - and if that fails, the hope is you'll select yourself out of the user pool. If you can't be milked for profit, you can at least not waste their server resources. This is the unfortunate consequence of an advertising-based business model. It offers you a shortcut to growth - a panel with a buttons labeled "More". More ads. More obnoxious ads. More sneaky ads. More manipulative ads. More people exposed, and exposed more often. There are many ways to grow that involve actually improving the product and user experience. But pressing one of the "More" buttons on the ad-panel is always easier, and gives you more money faster.