Facebook use among teens dropped from 71% in 2014-15 to 32% in 2022
pewresearch.org
pewresearch.org
Facebook is over-moderated and delivers extremely low-quality content. Their Instagram division got a bit better and is the only relevant competitor, however Reels is still highly unusable in Search form if you're looking for new, quality, and unique niche content.
If you're 18 years old and want to learn to fix a plumbing leak quickly, TikTok can deliver you a high quality video with the learning aspect done in 30-60 seconds. YouTube, you have to sit through 10 minutes of SEO / filler content, skip to 3/4 the way, and watch the process slowly because they prioritize 15-20 minute videos.
The video equivalent of the 'Learn X in 24 hours' garbage video courses but with 100x the manipulation, scams and prioritizing creators who have already gamed the so-called 'recommendation algorithm' and have drowned out other creators all in the name of the user being addicted to the new digital crack / cocaine.
Facebook was the last decade's trendy digital cocaine. TikTok is a no better digital drug but even worse.
I'm not quite sure what your angle is for this example, TikTok clearly serves low-follower & low-view videos in their algorithm. It's probably about every 1 in 8 videos if you scroll on the FYP. Each video is given a 1000-view chance to see if it gets boosted further.
Depending on what you like is what you're served, so if you like Home DIY videos & follow those accounts - you'll be served that. They then mesh in the more popular videos depending on external likes of people you follow, general trending (probably 1 in every 5 videos), and location.
If people are telling me TikTok serves scam, manipulating content... it's because of the videos they liked & people they follow. I doubt their account is dedicated to looking up SDR radios, fixing electronics, and general DIY videos.
It's incredibly easy to test this. There's a rough 4-week learning curve per account created that fine-tunes the content delivered to the user.
TikTok is information dense, but only if you already know exactly what you're looking for. My experience is that people will spend half an hour watching 30 TikToks to get the same information as a good 10 minute YouTube video.
FYI - the TikTok video length was extended to 10-minutes.
I don't use Facebook, I use [thing that is also Facebook]!
I love how easy it is to create an account on youtube and turn the settings to allow over 18 content.
reminds me of the time a friend talked about how they had the wifi locked down and when the kid was an adult he said oh ya I used to just use the neighbors wifi
- predominantly male, thus you're already capped at more or less 50%
- predominantly gamer, thus you already have to cut that 50% by some more
- predominantly PC gamer (good reduction in demographics)
- of those games, it's mostly competitive online games (yet another reduction in demographics)
- speaks the same language and can comprehend his favorite streamer (a huge reduction in demographics)
- will choose to watch a longer, unformatted content of his favorite streamer playing his favorite game over watching the same content, edit, with highlights, etc on his Youtube channel
Twitch's greatness isn't that 27% is quite a striking number, but it's revenue per user I believe is quite higher than any other social out there.
One quick proxy for age on Reddit is to see how many people are using the official app instead of the third-party, ad-free ones that came first, usually more than a decade ago.
Are teenagers more or less likely to use the official app do you think?
The unofficial API-based apps also don't have a lot of the "features" of the official app like paid skins/avatars, live streaming and others. The younger gen seems to have adopted these more than the older gen, which consider it a tacked-on thing that doesn't really improve Reddit.
I remember being disappointed 10 years ago at the immaturity of many discussions on Reddit. Even discussions that were supposed to be serious were riddled with and interrupted by someone going "your mom!", which would then be driven off topic with further discussions about everyone's moms.
I don't see that happening as much anymore.
Reporting statistics across a combined user base of billions, using a sample size of 1300 teens and 1300 parents??? What a joke. Should this kind of useless research really be discussed and spread around the internet?
As long as you have ~10+ in each category, your sample is large enough for a meaningful result. If you have less than 10, you might still have a good sample, but you might need to do a more accurate statistical test to find out.
That is, if you sample 1000 people, you are good from 1% to 99% range (where you'd have 990 to 10, and 10-to-990 respectively). But you can't draw conclusions if your results say 99.5% (because then you'd only have 995-to-5, and 5 is smaller than 10). If you split the sample into further groups (yes, no, maybe), each grouping should have 10+ results in it if you want anything close to the truth.