Facebook’s algorithm isn’t surfacing one-third of Chicago Tribune’s posts
When I had Facebook I was passionate about several topics, but I limited my posting to only 1 - 2 times a month. Initially when I started I got some engagement, questions, etc. As the years wore on I gained some friends who cared about those topics too, who liked my posts, shared, etc. Dozens of likes at times.<p>Well, turns out people paid less attention over time, or seemed too. Those posts got fewer likes and shares. Well, perhaps people just got turned off to my &quot;activist&quot; posting, bored, etc? If I posted a stupid life update about getting a new strainer though, fucktons of likes of course... Decided to ask my girlfriend and a couple family members if they even saw my posts on privacy or what have you, nope. It was buried or not shown on the feed when it came out.<p>It&#x27;s not just the feed either, the <i>ordering</i> is bleeding elsewhere. When I asked my girlfriend if she could see specific posts she went directly to my profile and couldn&#x27;t even find them often times because <i>Facebook now controls the order of items on someone&#x27;s feed</i>. They show &quot;trending items&quot; and them semi ordered older ones.<p>I think this article, and some personal experience, shows some of the consequences of being tied to a social platform that controls just <i>the order</i> of news on your feed. It is trivially easy for them to bury topics either because they just don&#x27;t like them or think they &quot;hurt user engagement.&quot; It&#x27;s a sort of super stealthy shadow ban, where sure, you content is &quot;visible&quot; but only in the loosest meaning of the word.<p>I had misgivings about Facebook initially from a privacy standpoint, but how much power they have to moderate content, <i>virtually imperceptibly</i>, was one of the final straws that got me off of it. We&#x27;re not just giving away personal information, we&#x27;re giving away our ability to persuade and connect in meaningful ways.