This stands in stark contrast with US-based social media companies, where both its users and content creators often speak like they're at war with the algorithm, yet to the tech elite these sites algorithms are tuned to perfection.
I couldn't speak for Tiktok's aims, but they seem different enough that its algorithm doesn't chafe in the ways that we've come to expect.
Who is they?
Anyway, you're wrong. TikTok pushes videos you want to see, while US app algos push content you are most likely to engage with. These are not the same thing. In fact, content one most engages with is content that generates outrage. Try not to get angry when you open Twitter. It's not easy.
Whoever runs the platform. That's the value they see in their platforms: the ability to control what you see, when you see it, and how you see it. You might only want to see what your friends and family have been up to, and in chronological order, but they are going to make sure you have to constantly scroll past shit you couldn't care less about to get to it, especially when that shit is advertising.
Not only do they do this for marketers, they actually think that making their users regularly disappointed and frustrated is a good thing. They think that forcing you to hunt for what you want makes finding it more rewarding and while you're scrolling past garbage/ads or searching for something you just saw, and cursing the obnoxious algorithm for hiding what you actually want they call it "engagement".
TikTok is also guilty of influencing what you see but they stay out of your way as much as possible. They bombard you with what you came for every minute you spend there. TikTok is massively popular and addictive because of that. US platforms could do that too, but their customers are advertisers - people who want nothing except to take your attention away from what you want to see.
You can go to twitter and get offended by bots, or you can go on TikTok and get bathed in dopamine. There's room enough on the internet for both experiences, but don't be surprised when people feel frustrated and annoyed by one of them and not the other.
No. US apps push creators, TikTok pushes content.
On TikTok, its the content that goes viral. Some nobody with 700 followers can have a video explode. That is exceedingly rare on YouTube. Its usually the channels with 1 million subscribers.
Advertisers love that, and so do platform owners. Its much easier to control and squeeze a few creators rather than a big diffuse group.
There’s most likely some middle ground for this. Too diffuse and it makes direct sponsorship difficult meaning the platform has more control over advertisements as they need to be algorithmically placed. Too centralized and you’re back in the land of cable where your advertising is less effective because of the broad cross section of the audience watching.
As far as “squeezing” creators goes… no, more centralized means higher demand which means higher pay and more control in creators hands.
Not at all. You forget that platform owners can suspend or ban someone without much recourse. "That's a nice channel you got there.. be a shame if something happened to it" and all that.
The point of no return was precisely the introduction of the smartphone because it lowered the amount of energy necessary for someone who doesn't care about technology to interact meaningfully with it. To this day most people don't own a personal computer unless they need it for work. But almost everyone has a phone.
Also, 1 hour without an interesting video is something I've never experienced on YouTube, even on new accounts (I create an account for new TVs). I think I'm simply not their target audience.
I couldn't even understand the point of 10-20% of the videos, like "What is this video trying to show here? A random person saying the word banana in a loop"
the blatant algorithm manipulation around elections and politics is just the icing on the cake. sure, china is probably doing this too, but they're either being more subtle or playing a longer game. meta et al may have come out ahead for a few quarters but what's that worth if user count is declining long term?
From time to time it will show you content adjacent to what you watch. After three or so viewings your feed will add the content you watched/engaged with regularly.
Press "not interested" twice (or sometimes once), and content will disappear.
American social media effectively ignores any input from users.
Are we sure? My experience with Instagram is the opposite, whenever you linger a bit on a reel you'll start to get more of that content
It's a pain because you have to constantly press "not interested" to curate your feed, I'd pretty much prefer to have content feeds, so that I can watch anything without having it go in my (im)permanent record
Just this past week I met a friend who uses TikTok and he said the same: Really good algorithm. He said when he watches "intelligent" stuff in it, the recommendations tend to be as "intelligent" or even more so. Whereas his experience with Instagram was that it quickly starts suggesting brain dead content.
I also do think there is a little bit of passive censorship about controversial topics. For example, if you lookup "free tibet" or "free hong kong", the posts there have at most 2-5k likes, and it seems like these posts never really "hit" the algorithm's sweet spot and get famous. Sure, this is entirely anecdotal, but I do find it a bit odd how the algorithm chooses what to show and what to hide.
Once again as someone who uses it, I think tiktok and its algorithm are definitely crippling the youth of America. At the same time, it doesn't sound right to ban it.