I'm getting a much higher volume of engagement with a more diverse set of folks, with 100+ followers here than with 2000 followers on birdsite.
Seriously, what gives? Any explanations?

After a few conversations, here's my conclusion:
1. There's no AI/ algo here controlling the flow of what people view.
2. Birdsite's AI/ algo (perhaps intentionally?) favors content with high emotion/ confrontation/ anger because it elicits reality-TV reactions
3. My content (like me) is very non-edgy, non-confrontational. I'm happy to be sweet, analytical, funny and soothing.
4. Therefore, I'm invisible on birdsite, and the absence of an algo actually favors content here.

Follow

Birdsite's algo actively elbows out civil behavior to make space for dramatic screaming matches. No wonder it triggers people! It's designed to do so. Birdsite smartly turns your anger into engagement and then into advertising dollars.
It's not just about people being "bad". Birdsite's algo actively wants you to be bad. Very very BAD 😈

@hackiechan If you can prove it, I am sure may Senior Law experts here like @sanjayuvacha can haul Birdsite to court

@nknagar @sanjayuvacha The ideal way to prove it would need someone to run analytics on birdsite's engagement metrics, or get access to the feed algo. Both are beyond my current skillsets.
I looked for academic studies and no one seems to have done the work on proving the existence of a rage algo, at least not the way they've worked on understanding the envy algos for FB and Insta.
Need a few skilled data analysts and academic researchers to pick this up, before lawyers do!

@paradroyd Exactly. Talk radio/ Reality TV/ Most panels and interviews on news channels these days.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!