Ben Werdmuller writing about Threads trading trust for growth:

If X has fake news, Threads is assumed to have fake views: engagement by any means necessary.

I did not know that Meta were incentivising engagement bait, but it now seems obvious. Despite my initial thoughts on liking Threads as a social network, I absolutely cannot stand to use it now. I had to write a post yesterday due to a few missed replies to my cross posted blog posts, stating as much.

Don’t get me wrong, the thirsty posts have always been there and from the very start people were insistent that you had to “train the algorithm”. Swipe away what you didn’t like and make sure you made a clear indication of what you didn’t like. Well, I am here to tell you, my friends, it makes absolutely no difference. Meta have turned the clout chasing idiots up to 422 instead of 10, and I can’t take it any more.

Turns out the constant stream of easily searchable questions, or incorrect hot takes in which the original poster never replies are funded by Meta themselves. That’s right, in an attempt to boost the platform, they are paying select accounts up to £5000 to post this crap.

Should users just choose to log out for a bit because of the constant barrage of open-ended questions with 500 replies, you can’t even get away from it on Instagram. I am inundated with “someone started a Thread” or I get red bubbles encouraging me to log in and read all the replies. Only to be treated by these useless things.

What am I supposed to do with that information exactly? Jump up and down with glee? Try harder for that hit of dopamine? No thanks, I am out.