And I never said that it was all the fault of the people themselves. I’m simply saying that this is human nature and social media responds to those gut feelings. More than old media.
Playing with the algorithm doesn’t necessarily mean breaking the rules. They only break the rules if they use or share more data than they pretend to be with others. Or violate local national law.
If Netflix gives me another horror movie as a suggestion because I just watched a horror movie, that’s also manipulation but it’s not a rule violation.
So there is no incentive either.[om te manupileren]
Well, if they want to survive. You can’t set up a server farm, write programs, and then say “just let them pass.” Tracking user behavior and providing them with the best experience (read: using the app for longer) is essential, especially if you don’t want to use ads. And certainly not if we start incorporating AI now.
“Old” media like TV also want to keep people on the couch during commercials – so commercial breaks often coincide. But this is actually a different order of manipulation than what Facebook (and others) do.
Yeah, like I said, they’re not that different in that regard. But television in the 1990s didn’t make people want to make their own shows showing them beheading people or tying them up with rubber. This happens every day with social media and messaging apps. Although there were programs in the United States, where criminality was openly demonstrated (including COPS). But again: the content comes from the medium. Now outliers on social media are constantly trying to outdo others. In contrast to the old media, very bad content is now also a guarantee of success, because negative attention is also attention. Attention = followers and engagement with your content.
So the point is that Facebook (and others) don’t provide the content themselves, but they play around (and break the rules) and thus make a lot of money. This cannot be justified simply by saying that it is the people themselves who love the attention.
Again, there’s nothing wrong with tinkering (read: making a playlist yourself). What matters is the content and to whom it is shown. Regulations can be submitted there. If privacy rules are violated, this must of course be addressed. But it’s not as if Meta is just a data-stealing company. There are sharp edges and are usually processed. But the great part is that you share certain information with them, in exchange for using their service for free.
“Coffee buff. Twitter fanatic. Tv practitioner. Social media advocate. Pop culture ninja.”
More Stories
Strong increase in gas export pipeline from Norway to Europe
George Louis Bouchez still puts Julie Tatton on the list.
Thai Air Force wants Swedish Gripen 39 fighter jets