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 "activist" 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'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't even find them often times because <i>Facebook now controls the order of items on someone's feed</i>. They show "trending items" 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't like them or think they "hurt user engagement." It's a sort of super stealthy shadow ban, where sure, you content is "visible" 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're not just giving away personal information, we're giving away our ability to persuade and connect in meaningful ways.