How Instagram’s algorithm is holding us captive
Today I learned the vice-presidential debate happened last night.
Actually, I watched the debate. I posted some witty tweets about it. I’ve read recaps of it, dinging Tim Kaine’s frenetic interruptions and Mike Pence’s stoic non-defense-defense of Donald Trump. But today I saw an Instagram post from a local NPR affiliate promoting its vice-presidential debate bingo card.
I saw this 16 hours after the fact because Instagram has gotten rid of its chronological feed in favor of an algorithm that it says better serves its users.
To that I say, shenanigans.
Instagram, which is owned by Facebook, has justified its new feed, powered by a mysterious algorithm, by noting users missed 70 percent of the photos posted to their feeds by friends, organizations and celebrities. That may be true, but by not even offering an option for users to see their feeds in order, the social network has done a disservice to the people it claims to serve.
I’ve always been a casual user of Instagram, posting a few photos a month of city scenes, homebrewed beers or miscellany that caught my eye. I follow 121 accounts, mostly friends, news organizations and interesting photographers. I would gather many users are like me, and many are uninterested in what power users like Kim Kardashian are doing. In fact, I know so. Kim has an impressive 88 million* followers (I have but 103, and that’s just fine); Instagram has 500 million monthly users, it announced in June.
Let’s be honest: the algorithm serves advertisers. Instagram is a free service, and it needs to make money. For years, it was free of advertisements. Then it had a few. Now, every few posts is sponsored. To tell the truth, I don’t mind the ads. They aren’t intrusive, they’re easy to scroll past, and I’m all for something I like finding ways to be sustainable. A business has to make money.
But why does it have to be at the expense of users and their enjoyment of a product?
The thinking goes, I guess, people will grumble about the changes, but there’s nothing they can do about, and so we will feed ads to these dumb saps the way we want to, and they will keep coming back.
That’s what Facebook did. Same with Twitter, which moved to an algorithmic feed earlier this year. But those networks at least have given users an option to see posts as they come in.
As a journalist, who has a real-time Twitter feed inches from my face most hours of the day, I know I’m not the typical social media user (I’m also older than the average Instagram user, but age is just a number, right?). But because I use social networks so much, I want them to respond to my needs, rather than treating me like a captive pawn.
Many companies use Instagram to promote their brand, products and events — nearly 50 percent of companies with more than 100 employees, according to an analysis by eMarketer. It’s a hugely important tool. Imagine the frustration of an organization whose followers didn’t learn about an event it held yesterday because Instagram’s algorithm didn’t deign to feed the post to users until today.
The average Instagram user follows 265 accounts; more than 60 percent of users log on daily, but nearly 30 percent post just once a month or less. And Facebook CEO Mark Zuckberg in 2014 said users spend about 20 minutes a day on the app. That means most users follow a digestible number of accounts, and spend enough time on the app to see most, if not all, posts.
On one hand it makes sense to show users what they have missed if they peruse the app on an irregular basis. But it’s also confusing, aggravating and annoying. Since the change, I find myself not using the app as much, and enjoying it even less.
A more benevolent social network would let its users have some choice in how they receive information. Like the option to see posts in chronological order. Like Twitter or Facebook.
In any event, I’ll be tuning into the showdown Monday between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Wait, that was last week?
*edits to change from 2.3 million to 88 million. A big difference!
