The Threads Creator Paradox
augment.ink
augment.ink
During the initial release, Threads seemed like a sanitized corporate playground for various big-name organizations to share their slop and promotions. Right now I get a lot of anti-Elon / anti-Twitter slop or political slop despite never engaging with such content. Most of the famous people I follow on Threads are just cross-posting the same content on every major social media platform anyway. I barely know anyone from real life that actually participates on Threads. In general, the tools for discovering interesting or new people don't seem to be there for Threads.
Finally, this current version of Threads is probably the best it's ever going to be. Once enough people are using the platform Zuck is going to start shoving ads down your throat, just like they've done with Instagram.
Edit: Instagram also keeps giving me notifications when certain people make posts on Threads, to try and get me to use the platform more often. And even Threads will randomly send me a notification that Yann LeCun made some post on Threads which it thinks I will really love, despite it being incredibly generic and uninteresting.
The probably forgot about it.
I've never seen an ad on Instagram when using the browser version from my desktop. Is this universal, and if so, why?
Yep, that is why I continue to use Twitter. The people I've met there (usually other solo founders and indie hackers) simply are more interesting that anyone on Threads, and I can actually interact with them whereas Threads feels more read-only, people post there but don't actually engage with the replies.
> anti-Elon / anti-Twitter slop or political slop
Twitter has an opposite problem, too much Elon slop that I don't want to see. If not for that, Twitter would be perfect.
fb feed in general tend to show stuff out of order for years and even if you manage to get into the old chronological sorting, it will keep you from scrolling further into the past giving you impression that in order to be up-to-date with what happens there you should be there.
I really believe that entering ActivityPub is anything else but a grab on freely available data they can use to train their algorithms. Neither I won't be surprised when they decide to leave fediverse - because that will eventually happen. They just need to figure out how to turn time spent there pretending to be "open", profitable.
---
And as a fun thing: I was scrolling yesterday mastodon and bumped on a few posts from an user who seems to be dealing with threads moderation system suggesting removal or edit of some of his posts [1], and a weird "scratchie" approach to unlock additional icons for the app. This feels as both overly sanitized and quite childish approach.
[1] - https://mastodon.world/@countercultureo/112783533143256553 [2] - https://mastodon.world/@countercultureo/112777883481257176
I really hope this never happens.
It was one of the key decisions that ruined Twitter as it motivated people towards engagement above all else. Which is why even in sub-communities like startups or tech everyone is posting clickbait and controversial takes.
One of the smartest things Threads has done that is unique is that it rewards users who reply and engage with the community versus posting popular content. It means all of the Instagram influencers have not been able to get much traction.
One is theoretically good for discovery of content that “the algorithm” thinks is suitable for you
The other is what you are asking for a stream of content _only_ from people you follow
I think you misunderstood the point I was making there - the "creators" I'm referencing here are the community builders who reply and engage, not the creators they're currently financially incentivizng from IG to post on Threads who "spam and scram."
I completely agree with you - incentivizng posting is a terrible method to push good practices. But incentivizng those who are already invigorating the community (like helping with events, promoting other community member work etc.) is what I'm pointing at here.
It happened with every forum that attempted revenue sharing, it happened with YouTube and Twitter and Instagram and TikTok, and this rate it'll probably happen with Threads too.
Is it a ghost town or am I just not the target demographic (what is the target demographic)?
https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=threads.net
Unlike twitter where we see a lot more submissions, and many get voted up.
This is conserved across billions of dollars of social media. I’m not on most social media. But a paywall clearly works.
Q: Remind us who are the creators of all this valuable content that needs to be protected against scrapers?
(Spoiler: not the platforms that are blocking anonymous access to it)
A good summary of why so many competitors fail to reach critical mass
Take Tiktok for example. Now you have the Tiktok Shop 1 in 3 posts is just "I'm sorry to all the people who paid $20 for this $1 piece of junk from Alibaba because it's $10 now" posts. I guess its lucrative but it really lowers the value of posts. "Creators eligible for commision" videos aen't as obnoxious but still aren't great.
Paid partnership videos likewise are 99% hollow and disingenuous.
As a user I've been trained to look at the bottom left and if I see any of these ad signifiers, I just immediately scroll up.
The creator fund tends to work better because it doesn't tend to really change someone's content. That's not strictly true. For example, stitches are ineligible for the creator fund so you'll find those in the fund will just screen grab instead.
But you also hear of cases of creators getting almost shadowbanned while in the creator fund and it's resolved by leaving it. We can only speculate why. Perhaps Tktok decided to push other creators on the the fyp who it thought would genreate better ad revenue. ' But it's so easy to ruin the entire ecosystem with monetization.
Weird story, but when I first used twitter ~2 years ago, it was to follow one specific current event, so my entire feed was one single-issue. I loved it! Over time I've obviously clicked on content on other topics and the feed got all mixed up with 20 different topics, which feels so gross and disorganised.
If anyone remembers 'Zite' app (which unfortunately got acquired and disbanded ~2014), it was basically a bunch of news feeds sorted per topic - super handy at the time for the things I was interested in: I could read 50 notes/articles on blockchain (then in its infancy), then on airbnb, then uber etc. I could read exactly one topic at a time without any distractions mixed in. It felt so organised. I really like single-issue feeds like what tweetdeck is (I think, I don't pay for it).
We can even end up in the situation where both Threads and Twitter collapse and people start to move to Mastodon. That would actually be great. More power to the people!
This is tautology. And monetising a 175-million user base [1] is not dependent on growth.
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2024/7/3/24191074/meta-threads-user...
Sure but engagement of that userbase will eventually start to drop because there are so many social networks out there and Threads is not that much different than your average XY network. Zuckerberg's chain of thought was "Twitter is a mess, we can do it better and we have the power of Facebook's and Instagram's distribution", but is that enough? What special and hot features Threads has? And just look at Google; how many products they shut down because of slow user growth and low engagement? killedbygoogle.com is the testemony....so many good products killed, just because they weren't cost-effective for Google.
This is the unsubstantiated pillar of your argument. From all objective measures, Threads is doing fantastically. It being undifferentiated is less of an argument now than it was at launch. They could die. But right now they’re a strong No. 2.
This kind of thoughtless, evidence-free garbage undermines everything else in the post.