Meta's vision for Threads is more mega-mall than public square
techcrunch.com
With its new Twitter competitor Threads, Meta could stand to learn from from both recent and ancient history.
  • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
    27·
    1 year ago

    It’s really interesting to see, that all these Megacorps are apparently completely unable to see, what actual people actually want. Especially Meta seems to be hellbent to press everyone in their schemata, and fails constantly.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      3·
      1 year ago

      But do they? Meta is absolutely raking in cash, so they’re obviously doing something that users engage with.

      What users want and what makes money are often at odds.

      • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
        0·
        1 year ago

        I’m talking about their new apps. Like Threads, Metaverse…

        Facebook, Instagram, and even YouTube only work on momentum. Facebook is clearly running out of steam and lost almost all relevance in the younger (that is, under 50) population. Instagram can still catch a large audience, but the young people already switched to TikTok.

        All in all, the old cash cows are slowly drying up and there’s nothing new coming.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          1·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, Zuckerberg wasted a ton of time and money on the Metaverse stuff, but they’re still insanely profitable and they seem to be turning it around. I’m not happy about that because I was hoping they’d fade away to irrelevance, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

  • rickdg@lemmy.world
    13·
    1 year ago

    Notice that neither twitter nor meta want to put in the work to moderate a political social network.

  • Pliny@beehaw.org
    7·
    1 year ago

    2 main issues I have with Threads right now -

    1. Inability to tailor your feed to just follow your friends. The amount of brand activity in my feed is frankly overwhelming and puts me off using the app completely atm.
    2. I don’t really see how this is going to be any different to IG in terms of content if it’s NOT going to be a place for breaking news and stories like Twitter was/is. If I’m just going to be served random content the algorithm thinks I like, then why bother having an account at all? Most people just seem to be using it in the same way as IG with pics accompanying a few lines of text.
    • flashmedallion@lemmy.nz
      2·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think it’s in its final form.

      It’s obvious that brands and influencers were offered the chance to be pre-verified and, while I haven’t seen direct evidence myself, the word is that they could get some kind of FB/insta promotional discounts by being there to post on day 0 with a witty canned line about how great it was to be on threads

      So when the app opened to the masses, they don’t have to follow anybody or wait for their friends before it had “value”. They open it up and there are a bunch of brands and “personalites” making it looking like it’s already alive and the place to be

      The other stuff will probably come later… although there’s the chance that they’re going after tiktoks model of “we know what you want”

  • fidodo@lemmy.world
    4·
    1 year ago

    It’s just Instagram without images. It’ll be influencers and meme accounts, for better or worse.

    • pazukaza@lemmy.ml
      2·
      1 year ago

      For better. 90% of Twitter’s and Facebook’s toxicity comes from political disputes.

      I haven’t seen that kind of toxicity in instagram, only the “look at my perfect life” toxicity, which isn’t as bad. At least they are cool pics.

      If I had to pick my poison, I’d pick Threads and Instagram. Thankfully, I don’t have to.

      • fidodo@lemmy.world
        1·
        1 year ago

        Yeah I view it as negative but closer to neutral. Hopefully the “look at my perfect life” posts are understood as being fake or requiring inheriting great wealth by now.