https://x.com/stat_sherpa/status/1867627066826400096
"π stands out as the most politically balanced social media platform. Unlike many other platforms, π has an almost equal split between Democrat (48%) and Republican (47%) news consumers. As you would expect, the data don't align with the "right-wing dominance" narrative projected by traditional media."
I wish that was the truth, because I believed Musk when he said he wanted absolute free speech, but he went back on those words.
As for this post, we don't know whether it is a credible survey, what the sample size is, how the survey was conducted, or even if it was conducted.
More often than not it is just a pointless and baseless claim. People will either blindly for it or against it, there is usually no scrutiny.
Even if the survey is true, it does not mean anything.
Because we know, I doubt anyone does not, Musk is partisan, and the platform is now pro-republican. I saw it myself: https://moviechat.org/nm1907769/Elon-Musk/66a568b0ee4811526b38bbba/A-lot-of-posts-from-Republician-and-Israeli-accounts-suddenly-coming-to-my-twitter-feed
That's funny. People on my feed were complaining that they were seeing tons of liberal posters they didn't even follow showing up on their feeds.
In point of fact, most people don't know how the algorithm works. If you see a, in your case conservative/Republican/Israeli post and respond to it, the algorithm is under the impression that you honestly want to see more of that in your feed. I made the mistake of responding to Warren today who was going on about how RFK, Jr. wants to end polio vaccines, which isn't true. So she either doesn't know what she's talking about and shouldn't be in the Senate, or she knows she's lying. Most people were telling her that, so I didn't need to chime in, but now that I have, I'm going to get everyone from Bernie Sanders to AOC showing up in my feed. I'll have to resist the temptation to tell them off until the furor dies down. And, of course, there are buttons to tell the algorithm you're not interested in certain posts.
So to help curate your feed to the people you want, don't argue with "the other side." Make sure you respond to lots of liberal/Dem/pro-Palestinian, etc., posts. You'll get more of what you want. Because despite what people say, those accounts ARE on Twitter in abundance.
I have a friend that I keep assuming will keep showing up on my feed. But if I take him for granted, I notice he's not there. So I hunt him down, like and comment on a lot of his posts, and I'm inundated with his tweets again. The algorithm is dead simple to learn, you just have to work it a little.
Oh, we know, I doubt anyone does not, that Musk does NOT run the platform. His CEO, Linda Yaccarino, does. According to Wikipedia, she "previously held the position of chairman of global advertising & partnerships for NBCUniversal." NBC/MSNBC is known for being just slightly to the left of center. Just a tad. π
On twitter I was a media consumer, I don't post things, because I don't have real followers.
I followed about 6 accounts, that is it, for information and updates.
I see everyday, the same updates, from the same accounts. There is no way all those weird things landed on my feed was "algorithm".
But again, that was my disappointment.
I now no longer access any social media platform.
Then you can use the buttons to say you're not interested. They work.
But I've noticed some people have a vested interest in hating Elon Musk. Go to BlueSky. We're noticing that there's an undercurrent of discontent brewing over there.
PS: This is a social media platform. Whenever I remind people of that, they backtrack and say they mean they don't use any of the big ones. This is still a social media platform. Back when it was IMDb (it claims it has no affiliation with IMDb, but there are posts here from 9 years ago, when it was IMDb), it was possibly the biggest social media platform on the internet. Col Needham had to keep adding servers. That's why Amazon wanted to buy it -- all those juicy servers.
I used an ad blocker on the web platform, I don't use apps, no intention to see ads.
So I mute all the accounts and contents I never wanted to see. I ended up doing muting non-stop, that is why I quit the platform.
PS: This is a social media platform.
I was here back then, and the first thing that Amazon did was to put up adverts for the DVDs they were selling. They gave it a shot as a commercial venture, but the threads and the trolls -- this place was known elsewhere as troll central -- would take some real work to police. So they allowed this site to data mine the IMDb boards. Interestingly enough, not a single post of mine made it over to here. Well, not one from an interesting board, at any rate.
You can follow people. It just take a bit more work. You can block people. Which is nice. I "like" by giving them a thumbs up. ππ»
It is different at message boards, you can post and reply, that is it.
They can't "algorithm", and force you to see what you don't want to see.
The true purpose of social platform was so they can commercialise your data and activity to much greater extent. Even I use ad blocker I can't stop the "algorithm" which content creators pay for you to see their stuff.
Or it is an election year Musk will do it for free for republicans, because it costs him nothing.
I don't recommend anyone on any social platform, because increasingly I find it offers very little real value, unless you want to develop a following and commercialise it.
also has the most spam bots
shareThe most active scammer and spammer platform both should go to facebook, because they have the most accurate personal data, which your people put there.
That is why I deleted my facebook accounts years ago, and you should too.
And never upload real information about yourself to social platforms.
x still has a pay platform where spammers can pay a subscription and have posts appear above actual humans
shareWow. They must have two levels of that. One is sort of entry-level. The other is for the people who want to publish. It's still all regulated by the algorithm, and you can hit the button saying you aren't interested in seeing that post.
If you know how to do it, Twitter is exactly what you make it.
On my last day on twitter I muted at least 50 accounts, then I decided to leave it.
It was not worth it.
I see it as part of the curating process, although I never had to mute 50 people in one day. Maybe I have a thicker hide. But I guess I now see why so many people moved to BlueSky.
shareOne day? I muted 50 people in about 10 minutes.
I think you followed too many people, and a lot of those were republicans so you don't notice as much.
I followed few tech guys, mostly about military weapons, so I immediately noticed all the difference.
A couple of my friends over there are all about the weapons. It's interesting when there are hotspots, as there are now. @CynicalPublius is likely going to become a full-time writer. He's good enough to make a go of it. And one can publish on Twitter. But he's also published in online publications. He tries to explain the military so that a layman can understand it. His posts are worth reading.
sharethese spammers never appear in my feed, but show up when I view comments/replies
shareOne gal kept complaining about the scantily-clad women who kept giving her the come-on. Then I found out they weren't in HER feed, they were in threads she decided to peruse. I haven't seen that sort of thing except on others' threads, and I use that button to say I'm not interested in seeing posts like that, and I haven't seen that garbage in a long time.
share