BlueSky Brightens Up the Gloom for Social Media Users

You're Just an Asset to ZuckerMusk

I’ve been writing a five days a week column –primarily based on open sources– for a dozen years, using a formula learned while working as a researcher in Washington DC. I cover a lot of (old and new) media ground thanks to a high reading speed backed by a decent understanding of history, along with an acquired sense of where to look along the way.

While I pay for too many subscriptions as part of staying informed, there is no way to keep up with an ever-increasing flow of data and opinions. I spend two hours each morning sorting through material, several more hours verifying sources, and try to make sure to incorporate a variety of perspectives.

I have found various social media platforms helpful in expanding my data collection and –at one time– increasing the reach of my analysis. Over the past year I have experimented with text-based applications emerging as alternatives to “enshittified” forums, like X and Facebook.

I have contributed matching materials (published columns) to each of those outlets and watched where my page’s engagement, statistics and subscriptions originate. In one sense, putting essays out there for all to see is like what I observed in using direct mail. A very small percentage of the viewers seeing content will choose to view, an even smaller subset will choose to engage, and a choice few will become regulars.

If you’re lucky enough to tap into the energy generated by external events encompassing public interest, the returns will exceed those norms. Restaurants that use direct mail targeting their customer base see a very high rate of return with pre-Christmas solicitation. Printed media lucky enough to get a mailing out in front of major revelations connected to their area of interest also can benefit in out of the ordinary ways.

There was a time, back in the dawn of social media, where postings drew bigger numbers for small publications. In Facebook’s case, that era ended when its corporate wise-guys got serious about manipulating what audiences saw based on value to advertisers and power-brokers.

Now, the company founder Mark Zuckerberg is moving beyond vanilla networking and clickbait. Human oversight of content (outsourced to professionals from many companies) is to disappear, being replaced by a soft version of mob rule.

Via Lyz at Men Yell At Me:

• He claimed the move is an effort to get back to the “roots around free expression on Facebook and Instagram.”

• Yes, that’s right. Zuckerberg wants to get back to the noble values on which Facebook was founded, namely the free right of men to rank the hotness level of the women around them and call them “uggos.”

• And per the new policy, that’s just what Facebook users will be able to do: sling whatever vile invective they want at women, Black people, LGBTQ people, and more. It’s inspiring. It reminds me of why this country was founded. Which, if you forgot, was so the Puritans could claim that kitty litter boxes were being put in British schools without the fear of someone saying, “Hey, that’s actually not true and has not happened.”

TechCrunch reports a swift increase in searches related to getting off Meta platforms this week, as news based on leaked internal company documents show users can now safely say things like “Jews are flat out greedier than Christians," and “immigrants are grubby, filthy pieces of shit.”

Google searches for terms like “how to permanently delete facebook” hit a maximum score of 100 — the highest level of interest possible on Google Trends. Related queries like “how to delete all photos facebook,” “alternative to facebook,” “how to quit facebook,” “how to delete threads account,” and “how to delete instagram account without logging in” have become breakout searches, with popularity suddenly increasing by over 5,000% compared to previous periods.

I wouldn’t take those reports too seriously, however. Few people are willing to take the time and effort to erase their histories and connections. And, as for moving data to another place, well as the Eagles sang in Hotel California, "You can check out any time you like, but you can never” leave."

Elon Musk’s X (nee Twitter) has increasingly become a trove of misinformation; AI driven disinformation, commentary based on both sets (dis & mis) of alternative facts, and (largely paid ads) groups using the platform in the hope of gaining engagement.

The company CEO’s descent into madness and right wing politics has alienated users, in particular many of the journalists who made Twitter a go-to choice for breaking news and links to serious investigations. The risk of less reliable sources being further amplified increases as many reliable news publishers leave.

The exodus from X/Twitter by high value accounts initially seemed to be going to Threads, an Instagram (Zuckerberg) appendage. However, the inability of users to see content in a real time format, along with Facebook/Meta’s unreliable algorithm suppressing breaking news in favor of titillating content has dampened enthusiasm.

For the moment, anyways, the consensus choice for those interested in current events is BlueSky. Founded as an experiment, but abandoned by Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey, this has emerged as a non-toxic, real-time resource for journalists, scientists, substackers (like me) and creative arts enthusiasts.

What BlueSky offers is a real time feed, the ability to create specialized streams, a user base not afraid of engagement, and the opportunity for each user to block out unwelcome individuals. The company’s moderation team (overwhelmed by recent growth, but trying hard) has done an acceptable job of blocking out AI-powered bots and the most hateful of the hatemongers.

It has the feel of early Twitter in terms of enthusiastic users, who mostly play nice. What little negativity I’ve seen has been about what users manners rather than what they believe. (Making graphics accessible for sight limited people thru alt-text is a biggie)

The criticism of BlueSky being an echo chamber for liberals, can be valid, depending on how users set up their accounts. There are people out there who have chosen to not be interested in debating MAGA talking points, something that’s making shit-stirrers feel very hurt.

Speaking of choosing, there are “starter packs” allowing users to opt into the feeds of people grouped by special interest. They can either be accepted as is or selectively vetted. I’m able to “hear” from elected representatives in DC by choosing the DC officials list.

The downsides, so far, are its smaller reach (26 million users) and what seems to be a frustrating battle with automated porn profiles (many of which contain links to phishing sites).

From a user standpoint, this means more work, in that each new follower should be vetted. It’s a quick process because you’ll know it when you see it, but there are days when the sheer number of women featuring extraordinarily sized secondary sex characteristics wanting to join your followers is ridiculous. Oh, and there are a few Gambian princlings thrown in for good measure.

I have created a half-dozen news feeds that I can look at as often or as little as I want. The science and urbanism feeds are the most interesting at present. My Treksky feed has been thin on content, so I (can make the choice!) visit less often.

I know social media isn’t for everyone, and what I’ve written here are my personal opinions. I like BlueSky because it feels useful and causes less anxiety than other places I’ve tried.

I should also say that it’s increasing interest in my daily mutterings.

There is a warning I need to pass along, namely that –for all its good intentions– BlueSky is not immune to the pressures of predatory capitalism. Right now its funding largely comes from being considered experimental and/or new. Sooner or later, the Venture Vultures of Silicon valley will tempt company leaders, and it’s possible for the process of enshittification to begin.

Nothing lasts forever, but the best thing about BlueSky may be the ability to take your tribe with you and go somewhere else when that day arrives.

Local news has invented another fake TikTok challenge by Taylor Lorenz at User Mag

• This is not the first time the media has pushed a fake social media challenge. After years of pushing fake YouTube challenges, in 2020, the news media turned its attention to TikTok.

• Dozens of viral challenges have been falsely attributed to the app. In 2023, representatives in Congress bombarded TikTok’s CEO with questions about nonexistent TikTok challenges, repeating false information gleaned from news stories.

• In 2022, my former colleague Drew Harwell and I broke the story that Meta even hired a well known Republican comms firm to smear TikTok in local news across the country by planting false stories about fake TikTok challenges, some of which were actual trends that began on Facebook.

***

What Lies Beneath SeaWorld’s Fireworks Launch Pad by MacKenzie Elmer at Voice of San Diego

• Mahaffy said he walks his dogs past the fireworks barge almost every day and he finds lots of fireworks debris. Not only do the fireworks explosions disturb his dogs, but so does the mess the shows leave behind.

• “There’s a number of people who come along here that as long as they’re carrying poop bags for their dogs, they have another bag and put garbage in it,” Mahaffy said. “It’s almost exclusively people that walk their dogs that (clean up).”

• Mahaffy said he would be happy to see the fireworks go, a sentiment that’s gaining traction. San Diego City Council President Joe LaCava recently said he would seek to end the nightly shows during the summertime and push for drone or laser shows instead. The public committee that manages Mission Bay Park unanimously voted to oppose fireworks displays, both legal and illegal last September.

***

The Real Threat of Fake Numbers - Will Trump cook the books? Why assume he won’t? By Paul Krugman at Krugman Wonks Out

• OK, maybe Trump and those around him won’t try to meddle with the data, or American institutions will be strong enough to stop them if they try. But exactly when over the past 8 years has anyone insisting that there are some things Trump won’t do or that he will be constrained by our institutions — which, after all, ultimately consist of people — been right?

• Now, if Trump appointees begin fudging economic data, we’ll know — there are enough independent ways to estimate inflation, ranging from purchasing manager surveys to internet-based algorithms, that any major understatement of inflation will quickly become obvious to economists. And for that matter, the professional staff at the agencies will probably speak up.

• But many contracts and policies — for example, Social Security cost-of-living adjustments — are tied to official inflation, even if everyone knows the numbers were cooked.