• megopie@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    The crux of the issue is that what the platforms want to be, and the reason many people want to use them are misaligned.

    A chronological feed makes no sense for a content delivery system, where the goal is to maximize the fit of the presented content to the interest of a user from a huge number of content creators. But it makes perfect sense if the goal is for a user to keep appraised of the lives of people they care about and be aware of events and situations with in that limited group. If someone spams or clogs up the feed with nonsense then people can tell them to nock it off, or mute them.

    The problem is that every “social network” site inevitably jumps to try and become a “content delivery system” because it promises greater engagement from the existing user base, and thus growth. Users are trapped by inertia and network effects and forced to engage with a content delivery system they didn’t sign up for, assuming they don’t just leave because the utility of the platform as a social network is gone. By forcing companies to offer an option of a chronological feed, it gives them a choice on how they want to use the platform.