“User engagement” is code for “addiction” • Hacker News Board

Re: “User engagement” is code for “addiction”

#71

Post by amelius » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 9:20 PM UTC

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #29

I don't like the current trend of social media apps burying users under push notifications, calls to action, and other engagement hooks. However, there's a second, parallel problem adding fuel to the fire: The more we talk about overindulgence in social media (or Netflix, or video games, or fast food) as an act perpetrated by evil corporations on us helpless individuals, the less sense of individual agency we give ou…

Perhaps a solution is that we separate the delivery of social media posts from the company that produces them. (Just like email can be received in a client that is not run by e.g. companies that send spam).

This means that we can teach our Social Media Inbox (abbreviated here SMI) that we don't like certain messages, and the SMI will remove them from the feed.

The trick here is that the SMI has its incentives aligned with the user, not the social media companies. So there is no incentive to make us addicted.

Re: “User engagement” is code for “addiction”

#72

Post by loveistheanswer » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 9:21 PM UTC

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #29

I don't like the current trend of social media apps burying users under push notifications, calls to action, and other engagement hooks. However, there's a second, parallel problem adding fuel to the fire: The more we talk about overindulgence in social media (or Netflix, or video games, or fast food) as an act perpetrated by evil corporations on us helpless individuals, the less sense of individual agency we give ou…

>I know the common refrain is "Delete Facebook!" but that's the equivalent of abstinence-only education

Not at all; its more like breaking up with a toxic, manipulative, dishonest partner. There's many more fish in the sea and there's many more ways to heathily socialize than just Facebook. Though I suppose people in abusive relationships often have a sort of Stockholm syndrome where they see no alternatives.

Re: “User engagement” is code for “addiction”

#73

Post by CivBase » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 9:21 PM UTC

Nasrudith wrote: post #59

CivBase wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why invest in "providing value to users" when psychological manipulation is so much cheaper?

Because people tend to drop you and forget about it when you only provide clickbait and doomscroll fodder when they realize that you have nothing of value to provide.

I'm not so sure about that. What value does Facebook offer that isn't done better by a dozen other platforms? Most people I talk to openly admit it provides them with no value, but they still idly scroll through their feeds day after day and can never bring themselves to ditch the platform. Simply put, they're addicted. Facebook is widely hated yet wildly successful because they have mastered psychological manipulation.

Re: “User engagement” is code for “addiction”

#74

Post by SpicyLemonZest » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 9:23 PM UTC

legerdemain wrote: post #67

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your experience is far from universal. Twitter has made my life measurably worse: I'm less happy, have less free time, react less charitably to people I disagree with. I can look through my comment history and identify the periods where I was most active on Twitter, because I'm constantly flying off the handle at people for no good reason.

Would you call yourself helplessly "addicted" to Twitter? If not, then you disagree with the premise of TFA.

I would. Every morning, I wake up saying I'm going to log off Twitter for the day as soon as my coffee's done, and most days I end up logging multiple hours of Twitter time.

Re: “User engagement” is code for “addiction”

#75

Post by edmundsauto » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 9:30 PM UTC

CivBase wrote: post #73

Nasrudith wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because people tend to drop you and forget about it when you only provide clickbait and doomscroll fodder when they realize that you have nothing of value to provide.

I'm not so sure about that. What value does Facebook offer that isn't done better by a dozen other platforms? Most people I talk to openly admit it provides them with no value, but they still idly scroll through their feeds day after day and can never bring themselves to ditch the platform. Simply put, they're addicted. Facebook is widely hated yet wildly successful because they have mastered psychological manipulati…

Speaking for myself as a light FB user in the US, I get a ton of value from seeing my relatives' updates. Otherwise, I would have no connection with the next generation of babies in my family.

I generally find this line of thinking problematic: conversations with a homogenous and small group -> generalization based on an interpretation of their interpretation of their experience.

Also objectionable but on the other side: people's revealed preferences for how they spend their time are better indicators of what they find valuable.

Neither explanation is particularly compelling except as confirmation bias IMO.

Re: “User engagement” is code for “addiction”

#76

Post by dharbin » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 9:30 PM UTC

teh_infallible wrote: post #16

The word “addiction” is overused in my opinion. Bad habits are not addictions. An addiction is something which actively harms you, but you can’t stop doing it. Yes, you can argue social media is harmful, but it generally does not cause people to lose their jobs or spend all their money.

Can someone have a gambling addiction? I've often heard that gambling addiction is a real problem, so why can't social media be addictive? Social media and mobile games like to use similar "engagement" techniques as slot machines, for example.

Re: “User engagement” is code for “addiction”

#77

Post by qvrjuec » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 9:33 PM UTC

mgraczyk wrote: post #69

Posts like this completely misunderstand how companies like Facebook think and operate. As a result, they cause people to fight boogymen instead of working toward positive change. Yes, using Facebook instead of doing something like talking in person or reading a book is probably worse for you in the long run. But most people don't do those things instead of Facebook. Instead they use Tiktok. Or watch TV. Or read Teen…

So at what point does the metric used for user engagement cross a threshold for 'addiction'? Wouldn't incentives to drive this metric up across the board to increase revenue outweigh the pressure to maintain a healthy relationship with the Facebook Family of Apps™? Regardless, I still can't see the motivation for Facebook to act in a way to ensure the user is healthy, only to ensure the user is engaged at an optimal level for Facebook and not the user.

Re: “User engagement” is code for “addiction”

#78

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 9:34 PM UTC

loveistheanswer wrote: post #72

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #29

I don't like the current trend of social media apps burying users under push notifications, calls to action, and other engagement hooks. However, there's a second, parallel problem adding fuel to the fire: The more we talk about overindulgence in social media (or Netflix, or video games, or fast food) as an act perpetrated by evil corporations on us helpless individuals, the less sense of individual agency we give ou…

>I know the common refrain is "Delete Facebook!" but that's the equivalent of abstinence-only education Not at all; its more like breaking up with a toxic, manipulative, dishonest partner. There's many more fish in the sea and there's many more ways to heathily socialize than just Facebook. Though I suppose people in abusive relationships often have a sort of Stockholm syndrome where they see no alternatives.

[deleted]

Re: “User engagement” is code for “addiction”

#79

Post by yawaworht1978 » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 9:37 PM UTC

You could also say it is staying competitive. User engagement is important, the user should be in charge of setting limits. Sure, anything can become addictive if the user has the "right" personality, but using an app is still a far cry from using recreational drugs. However, porn and some gaming are coming close.

Re: “User engagement” is code for “addiction”

#80

Post by misdichotomy » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 9:39 PM UTC

mywittyname wrote: post #42

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #29

I don't like the current trend of social media apps burying users under push notifications, calls to action, and other engagement hooks. However, there's a second, parallel problem adding fuel to the fire: The more we talk about overindulgence in social media (or Netflix, or video games, or fast food) as an act perpetrated by evil corporations on us helpless individuals, the less sense of individual agency we give ou…

> I know the common refrain is "Delete Facebook!" but that's the equivalent of abstinence-only education. We need to start talking about how to configure Screen Time on iOS, or how to use Facebook's built-in tools to hide content you don't want to see. I see it more akin to the opioid crisis. Just like drug manufactures shouldn't be pushing opioids as a way to deal with minor pain and depression because they know it…

> Normal people are seriously outgunned here.

This is quite right. PragmaticPulp's phrase "an act perpetrated by evil corporations on us helpless individuals" is a bit of rhetorical jujitsu, creating a strawman to set up a rallying cry "I believe people have agency!" You don't have to assume that individuals are "helpless", as if they are generally helpless and lacking agency, to agree that these corporations are exploiting them.

That said, people's agency is limited (bounded rationality). Awareness of how one is being manipulated is not evenly distributed among the population (asymmetric information). And even when there is awareness, people are unevenly affected by it and unevenly empowered to deal with it.