That’s a sharp turn from his statements in 2023laying out the goal of a “less angry place for conversations” that wouldn’t do anything to encourage politics or hard news. However, under Meta’s new approach to moderation — and new rules about what users can say on its platforms— that goal is going out the window just as the Trump administration prepares to take over.
Until now, users have had to opt-in to seeing recommendations of content deemed political, but the change rolling out this week in the US and to the rest of the world next week will turn on the recommendations and a content control setting available with options for less, standard (the default setting), and more.
In a series of Threads posts, Mosseri reiterated, “I’ve maintained very publicly and for a long time that it not our place to show people political content from accounts they don’t follow,” and that “it’s proven impractical to draw a red line around what is and is not political content.”
In a video on Instagram, he said that the push for political content — particularly from users on Threads — is “by the way, very different from the feedback we were getting only a few years ago about people feeling that they were overly exposed to political content on our platforms.” Of course, according to the Wall Street Journal, that was before Mark Zuckerberg experienced the effects of filters cutting down the reach of his post about recovering from a torn ACL and before Meta’s new and friendlier-to-Trump policy chief took over.
Well, guys, the internet was a good idea while it lasted. A fun experiment. Shame it's gonna take the rest of modern society along with it.
Can we just go back to anonymously calling each other insensitive names while playing video games with triple-digit ping times? Any era after that was just the downfall.
That wasthe Internet. People using only AOL or something (I'm born in 1996, so not sure) would apparently not be called Internet users.
It's the same with Facebook and co now, except they squatted on our free communication space. So they managed to pretend there's nothing else in the Internet.
Can still have the old thing. Things needed for everyone to use it as intended - hosting and connectivity and naming and authentication solutions. Hosting and connectivity - no-configuration distributed storage of data from your webpage or whatever, solutions to NAT traversal not requiring user configuration (think old Skype). Naming - that's centralization by definition, but still points of failure can be limited to names signed by some identity provider that doesn't have to be online. Authentication - that'll have to be cryptographic identities, so what's lost is lost. But one can make a convenient for the user "inheritance" operation, of grabbing everything signed by a certain identity to clone it (while obviously a new identity, can be used in case of losing the old one).
There's Fediverse. There's federated or selfhostable messaging. There's a multitude of selfhostable solutions for everything. There are people's personal websites. It just cannot be killed off by its very nature.
We cannot go back to anonymous users calling each other names. People went way too far down the “my feelings are hurt and you’re going to jail” path. There’s no going back to “if you don’t like it go somewhere else” like it used to be.
Well...
If you're a Threads/Fediverse user you might want to consider taking a look at the instances that are federated with Threads depending on what you think about this news.
Based on this list, any instances you recommend? I did Lemmy.world because I had no clue what I was doing. Just deleted FB and IG accounts, so I’m ready for change!
Lemm.ee has been great to me. The instance owner and maintainer seems like a genuinely decent person. We refused to federate with threads but otherwise we federate with pretty much everyone and leave it up the user to decide what they want to be exposed to.
More like they were bowing to the previous administration. Political content is a top driver of engagement. There's no way they thought it was ever a good idea to suppress it.
i'm setting up a friendica and pixelfed instance on my personal domain to get my family using it. it's not much but at least it gives them an alternative.
It's sqewed in favor of the right, with non-right leaning comments being hidden in favor of those that call all LGBTQ+ people pedophiles (this predated the whole community guideline change fiasco, and was this since progressives started to hate GenAI), and in some countries, you barely get any leftist content, all while the right is being forced upon you.
Could it also be that the opinions you’ve mentioned, the “right”, are the majority, and they had been disproportionally silenced in favor of giving megaphones to the minority?
I could go both ways on this and it’s very hard to see, but I’m not in favor of disproportionally silencing or promoting any agenda or voice
They weren't before? Instagram was running political ads since at least 2017.
It went under the radar because it wasn't in the US, and nobody cares about content not in English.
spent all of last year chasing queer users away by claiming having an lgbtq identity was politics just so they can flip and force conservative grifters into your feeds whether you like it or not
So long as, in the absence of rules, everyone is treated the same. Major social media platforms swing hard right, meaning that leftist positions will be marginalized regardless of the rules or absence thereof.
I thought instagram was for college aged girls to post thirst pics, and then complain that they can't find anybody who respects them for their intellect.