mastodon - Link to source

It’s been a weird couple days; I keep running into this talking point that “journalists won’t use Mastodon unless we incentivize engagement farming”.

Meanwhile I’m having a *great* experience here, because I use it to— I dunno— actually talk to people and form relationships?

I reject the premise that mastodon isn’t useful for reporters. I think it’s more accurate that modern news orgs use social media in purely extractive ways.

You might get more reporters that way, but you won’t like them.

in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

EVHaste

I think if we’re honest with ourselves, the “service” most reporters provide on social media is entirely self-serving. A one-way firehose of signal boosting and self promotion.

“Look at me! I wrote this story. Click on it!”
And then you ask them a question, or have a correction, and nobody reads it, because Wired doesn’t care about building a community, just reaching a consumer. It’s fire and forget.

We already have a tool for that, it’s RSS. What value does reposting a link here provide?

This entry was edited (6 days ago)
in reply to Erwin

mastodon - Link to source

EVHaste

@odd I’m not sure. I wasn’t on Twitter in the early days. By the time I got there it already sucked. lol

I did get to experience invite-only Bluesky, but I can’t really comment on it from a reporting standpoint because I only used it to shitpost. Which was very community oriented, but totally devoid of professional value.

Mastodon really is the only place I’ve had any interest in my work and I just assume that’s cause I’m pals with folks that live in Seattle here.

@Erwin
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Luci Bitchface Angerfoot

@odd when twitter was smaller, two way conversation was indeed more common, there was
more a vibe of experimentation and play- and the rules were a bit different than how it is now:

no pictures, no replies, no retweets, no search, and history only could go back about 100 posts.

as soon as retweets, replies and search got added, the vibe got less fun because retweets let dumb throwaway remarks go “viral”, blind replies turned virality into pile ons, and search enabled kiwifarms style analysis of targets

@Erwin

Sören reshared this.

in reply to Luci Bitchface Angerfoot

mastodon - Link to source

EVHaste

@bri7 @odd I bet the internet itself is also kind of different than back then. I don’t have a base for comparison with twitter but I encountered this recently going back to play WoW.

It’s like.. the sewage we’ve all been wading in has made people more cautious and cynical. So it’s kind of just harder to talk to strangers than it used to be online?

At least, it’s hard to imagine using the internet in some of the ways that used to feel normal.

@Luci Bitchface Angerfoot @Erwin
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Alex@rtnVFRmedia Suffolk UK

@bri7 @odd exactly. Britain's Communications Ministry (Ofcom) recently noticed that folk were using social media less. and moving to private messenger services.

A lot (especially younger women) have had way too many bad experiences to go around "talking to strangers", and I don't think they are going to be flocking to Fedi either - the damage has already been done.

@Luci Bitchface Angerfoot @Erwin
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Erwin

Could be. I'm pretty nostalgic for the time when search was Webcrawler and Altavista. Don't know if the early internet was as trustworthy as I'd give it credit for now, but at least there were less financial incentives to lie to users.

Now I don't really have the energy to retake the net. I read about the small web and it sounds a lot of fun, but somehow I can't really get the hang of it.

@bri7

@Luci Bitchface Angerfoot
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Ryan Quinn

It is different. It was more fun 2 decades ago. The Internet wasn’t controlled by grifters running scams.

I was talking with a friend about the dead Internet theory, and how it relates to online services, and everything really. Something starts cool, gets popular, reaches the mainstream then dies due to it being overrun by desperate crabs trying to make a dollar in this capitalist hellscape to escape the bucket.

This time, most of the Web is on the backside of the bell curve rather than a single service.

@bri7 @odd

@Luci Bitchface Angerfoot @Erwin
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

grrl_aex

@bri7 @odd

Because there is no way to _know_ who anyone actually *is* in an online enviro now. The only way to be sure who anyone is, online, is to know them irl. Voice, video, images, identity- it can all be easily faked now. The world of posting up yr pic in a gaming or a hobby forum (what's left of them) and making close LD friends is pretty over. Sharing your voice, image and personal life now is just setting yourself up as a target for fraud. Sux, but that is the internet today.

@Luci Bitchface Angerfoot @Erwin
in reply to Luci Bitchface Angerfoot

mastodon - Link to source

Luci Bitchface Angerfoot

@odd there’s a nuance there. Mentions came before replies; and there’s the subtle difference that a mention didn’t create a thread. there was no reply threads for a long time so “replies” were implied by time. so if someone was experiencing a pile on the only way to know is to go to the “mentions” tab on their profile.
(a thing that used to be possible)
@Erwin
in reply to EVHaste

hometown - Link to source

Dianora (Diane Bruce)

The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please go to the original post.
@odd I had an invite to the Bluesky thing but I remembered how much Fecesbook and Twittler sucked so I declined. I imagined I would get inappropriate ads eventually as I did on Twittler. On commercial social media, we are not the customer, we are the product.
@Erwin
in reply to Erwin

mastodon - Link to source

Cassandrich

@odd Early and even late Twitter was so much better from what "journalists" do on "social media" now.

Cassandrich

2026-04-06 17:33:18

mastodon - Link to source

Back on :birdsite:, I felt like they did provide a service. They cited their own articles, but adversarially to the publications they worked for - poking through the clickbait and bullshit headlines, telling the stories of what they cared about, how they researched the story, etc. that they weren't allowed to do in the actual publication.

Now, all they do is act as mouthpieces for the companies they work for. 🤮


@Erwin
in reply to Erwin

mastodon - Link to source

Peggy Heinkel-Wolfe

@odd
Old journalist here. Early Twitter was really good for getting those two-way exchanges that made your reporting stronger. But that didn't last, and being in those spaces became increasingly caustic. I quit FB in 2018 and Twitter in 2021.

But even in the beginning of for-profit social media, you could feel the shift as a journalist--we were unpaid workers for all those walled gardens.

But the problem is, loads of people get their "news" on social media. Journalism is community work, and really good, independent journalism is part of the resistance. But when your community is there looking for news on the for-profit socials, it's a huge problem. Mastodon is one of the few places where people have a little more understanding of this framework and have taken some affirmative steps toward fixing it.

Perhaps it needs to be said: very few people get into journalism because it pays well. I was never paid very much. Most of us believe in the importance of this community work.

Thousands of journalists have been laid off in the past two decades. No one came to help us. But no one working in the business was surprised. The old business model doesn't work anymore. Those remaining know that. Chasing clicks is just the last few drowning men grasping at straws.

@Erwin
in reply to Peggy Heinkel-Wolfe

mastodon - Link to source

EVHaste

@phwolfe @odd Thanks for doing that work, fam. I know how thankless it is.

It’s funny (not funny ha ha, but funny cry emoji) that the “nobody wants to pay for news but also they all demand it be accessible on Facebook” thing was called out in Elements of Journalism way back in 2014! Way, way before I got into the profession. The layoffs were also a problem then. And it’s only gotten worse.

I dunno how to fix this. But I’m damn sure becoming Instagram won’t do it.

@Peggy Heinkel-Wolfe @Erwin
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

derptron

I'm imagining a whole lot of reasons why you could expect better turnaround from social media posts, even if you treat it just like a feed and never reply to anything. Primarily engagement--like my blog probably won't get any attention not only because it sucks but also because there's no way to engage with it. Until I fix that I'm probably wasting time.

I can add comments to my site but that's going to be a new service they have to join or I'm enabling social media commentary.

in reply to Olivia Vespera

mastodon - Link to source

clew

Oo, interesting.

… I want to talk through stuff with people i reasonably trust, with enough variety to have many opinions, with some social norms so disagreements don’t spiral.

That’s both a LOT and something we’ve been doing since language, yesno? I’ve decided that online groups are “easy come easy go” by nature.

I’m still on some old timey forums for specific interests, with more or less “just friends” structure stuck onto them. More blew up. Moderation is hard.

@OliviaVespera @Haste

@EVHaste @Olivia Vespera
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Patrick Loftus 🖖

it’s so much easier for them to negotiate a deal with a central owner of non-federated social media to artificially force their posts into your view.

That doesn’t work here if there is an instance devoted to fire and forget with no community participation I’d personally block it at the instance level.

It’s amazing to me that corporations have positions for social media posters but not necessarily participatory users. It’s all about an initial hook, click and view counts.

I don’t care who sees my posts here some are just into the void. I can be as weird as I want to be. Also I have no relatives that call when I post ambiguous song lyrics worried about my mental health.

millennial fulcrum reshared this.

in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Cassandrich

Back on :birdsite:, I felt like they did provide a service. They cited their own articles, but adversarially to the publications they worked for - poking through the clickbait and bullshit headlines, telling the stories of what they cared about, how they researched the story, etc. that they weren't allowed to do in the actual publication.

Now, all they do is act as mouthpieces for the companies they work for. 🤮

in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

nerd teacher 🦇

I've run into a small handful of reporters and journalists who've done that, along with a few other content creators who... don't really engage with folks but are here to just drop self-promo and that's that.

I don't really mind certain kinds of self-promo (e.g., "I wrote a thing!" or "I made a thing!"), especially when it's nested within genuine interaction or other interesting posts (even if it's shitposting with another person). I love seeing people drop their art (whatever it is) or writing, and it's given me a lot of cool and new perspectives I haven't otherwise found.

But I think if more journalists and reporters actually engaged with people, it might alleviate (not solve) the issue of how a bunch of 'em forgot who they claim they write for and inform. It might even get a few to stop doing disinformation or strong one-sided perspectives of news stories (e.g., when all of their info for a story comes primarily from cops or corporate mouthpieces without further looking into it).

in reply to r-hold

mastodon - Link to source

EVHaste

@rhold I will say I’ve noticed an uptick in… not ads, exactly, but buttoned up branded “content” in the popular feed on .social.

I’m curious how long the “no brands” vibe will last.

Some days it’s like… Proton product announcement followed by Tuta product announcement followed by Open Office product announcement. It’s not overwhelming yet but it rhymes with social media as I’ve experienced it elsewhere. Makes me a little nervous.

@r-hold
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Alex@rtnVFRmedia Suffolk UK

@rhold those semi commercial FOSS brands (along with some of their devs) have been present on Fedi for years (you can add Nextcloud to the mix as well).

I'm occasionally mildly annoyed by the way some of these brand accounts never seem to reply to anyone and they often go quiet if folk point out bugs/issues in their replies, but they seem to have got better in that respect and at least its software/services that folk on here tend to actually use..

@r-hold
in reply to Alex@rtnVFRmedia Suffolk UK

mastodon - Link to source

EVHaste

@vfrmedia @rhold yeah so I’m actually pretty happy to see FOSS tools here, so I look the other way for things like Open Office. I want them to be successful.

I have however noticed that same tendency with adjacent brands (specifically Firefox) to not engage with the community, especially when the question is critical.

(I do agree that this is not really a convenient place to submit but reports, it would create confusion for engineers, so I’m leaving that alone)

@Alex@rtnVFRmedia Suffolk UK @r-hold
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Alex@rtnVFRmedia Suffolk UK

@rhold in some cases (particularly on Fedi) its not as much full bug reports (as folk know not to do that, or have already checked issue lists), but queries about the project which never get a response (not even a post to a link on the projects official website).

Or the same marketing post is cut and pasted to everywhere (Fedi, Bluesky, Threads etc) without any plans to engage with anyone..

Also as Fedi attracts more non-techie folk (as it is slowly doing), some might at least need some gentle encouragement to point them to where issues lists and forums are for the software they are using.

@r-hold
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Cliff'sEsportCorner

How are you defining journalists? For me a journalist is someone like @briankrebs Not many around anymore, I gave up on NPR over a decade ago because quality and depth were gone, despite them still retaining some real journalists, they weren't allowed to work as such. I suspect Brian has much deeper understanding and insights into the issue than myself with his background and expertise.
@BrianKrebs
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Cliff'sEsportCorner

@briankrebs my point was many so called journalist now don't meet my definition. Wasn't clear to me how you defined it, as in anyone working for online or print company doing articles? I really don't know of any big orgs that really meet my personal criteria anymore. BBC is only one I follow via RSS anymore and even there small podcasts/youtubes are often faster and higher quality. And I was trying to make clear I think they are out there just no jobs for them at big orgs anymore.
@BrianKrebs
in reply to Cliff'sEsportCorner

mastodon - Link to source

BrianKrebs

@CliffsEsport Yeah, back when I first started in journalism in the 90s, the major publications all had real experts who were assigned to or carved out specific beats like aviation, cars, healthcare, education, the environment, the courts, etc. These were largely well educated people who knew these awfully complex subjects intimately and could explain them simply but fairly to anyone. To the extent they want any reporters to write about these specific subjects anymore, newsrooms tend to favor young (cheap, replaceable) general assignment folks who lack that institutional knowledge.
@Cliff'sEsportCorner
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

SlightlyCyberpunk

I think it's a question of aligned incentives. A lot of journalism has to drive eyeballs to advertisers to stay in business. And they use the same ad networks with the same engagement metrics as corporate social media, which also has to drive eyeballs to advertisements through their algorithms. So the strategy that boosts engagement one place will boost it everywhere. Then these folks try to play that same game here on Mastodon...and it doesn't work.
in reply to Oberst Enzian

mastodon - Link to source

barbra

@oberstenzian and if you look at the average news site, it's filled with trackers (hint - there's no such thing as an "essential cookie") and clickbait ads.

Block JavaScript and most paywalls stop blocking you. The ones that use JavaScript to insert story contenf, you can find alternatives elsewhere.

@Oberst Enzian

Lorraine Lee reshared this.

in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Photon Empress 🌸

Dunno, I kinda feel like it is a chicken/egg issue here. The nice thing about Twitter was that everyone was there. Once it fell people moved, but no a lot moved here.

So journalists (well everyone) need to post in more places and likely want to optimize for eyes seeing their stuff. Maybe it's just me, but I just don't see as much engagement here as I do on other platforms?

in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Scale Theory

Then why are WSJ, propublica, the verge, forbes, etc (crap complicit press) on #mastodon trending page without logging in?

Here for the propaganda spreading phenomenon alone or trigger bait?

Gotta believe what they tell us, nothing else, you're not to think on your own. Got it!
Hence why no uproar about the overthrow, biggest news of the century, millennium, which should be front page since billionaires made their bribes using illegal citizens united loophole.

#mastodon
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

gabby wheels

I'm still a newbie here, but, it seems to me that reporters, lawyers, scientists, etc find that mastodon is isolating because it's harder to be visible. The redundancy of separate instances that lead to a robust independence also leads to scattered bases with not all posts being visible to all people.

I think professionals want to find other professionals, not just grift for their own income.

in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Mike Fraser

Translation: They want an algorithmic platform that will amplify their broadcast. Despite the lip service most reporters don't actually want to engage, they want to put a story out and broadcast it. That's why Mastodon doesn't work for so many of them.
Also they usually want some sort of measurable metric so that they can justify their existence to their boss. 10k likes on a bot laden network still looks good to people who don't get it.
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Snippety Snap (she/her)

The only factor that should guide journalists (or anyone, really) about where to post and engage is whether their intended audience is there. Period.

I'd bet that Democracy Now! doesn't post to Truth Social. When JD Couchfucker established an account on Bluesky, he became one of the most blocked accounts.

Are your peeps there? If not, don't waste your time.

#SocialMedia #Journalism

#socialmedia #journalism
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Harry

The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please go to the original post.

SkinCeuticals C E Ferulic (1 fl. oz.)
Get Link: sily.ink/V2ovE

SkinCeuticals' C E Ferulic features a synergistic antioxidant combination of ferulic acid and pure vitamin C and E to environmental damage caused by free radicals. In addition to antioxidant protective benefits, this formula improves signs of aging and photodamage to reduce the appearance of lines and wrinkles while firming and brightening your complexion. #skincare #usa #canada #unitedkingdom

Dermstore: Skin Care, Sunscreen, Hair, & Beauty Products

Shop professional and luxury skincare, hair & beauty products. Discover dermatologist-recommended brands & expert skin health advice at Dermstore.
Dermstore
#canada #usa #unitedkingdom #skincare
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Patrick H. Lauke

urgh yes ... mastodon.social/@patrick_h_lau…

Patrick H. Lauke

2026-04-05 14:25:10

mastodon - Link to source

threads and bluesky are single monolithic platforms. masto federated. so would likely depend on which masto server someone's posting on i'd guess as a starter...

also, purely anecdotally/for my own part, there's less of a culture of boosting/liking/trying to make things go viral for the algorithm. lack of apparent engagement may not signal lack of people actually reading posts/following links/etc.


in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Jo - pièce de résistance

Some are here, one of my faves @rachelgilmore.substack.com is here at least as automated bridge.
I find people very engaged here with politics. It’s about finding people you genuinely resonate with their content here which means you also have to be genuine. And a lot of mainstream journalists are so busy playing an access, capitalist, and propaganda game, that what they offer is of no interest to most Mastodonians who seem to want to build a post-capitalism world.
@rachelgilmore.substack.com
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Nazo

I really don't get the journalists thing anyway. It's literally the only style of platform that makes sense for journalism. For one thing, they can own and control their own server instead of relying on the whims of a company that may or may not manipulate their messages and reach — or worse, turn their info in to the government.

I just don't really get it. Every large business that uses social media should want to own their own server... Journalists should want to more than anyone.

in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

mcc

Over the same last few days actually *Bluesky* has been having an argument about "right-wing opinions get so much negative pushback here, it's going to drive away the right-wingers and centrists". And also Twitter has been getting so concerned about "Wow this site is dead for anyone except right wingers" that even Nate Silver is kinda freaking out

…maybe this just doesn't work? Maybe social media is just never going to be the thing that it was in 2015 again, ever again?

in reply to mcc

mastodon - Link to source

EVHaste

@mcc funny how it always comes back to the “safe space for differing viewpoints” thing, isn’t it? Which of course is code for “I think I should be able to say fascist shit and get away with it”. Smh.

I have also observed the dunk culture thing about Bluesky (which I left)! I assume because that was the language of Twitter before it.

I’m okay with not being able to re create some lightning in a bottle moment for social media. Maybe it’s not *meant* to exist in that form, or not healthy too.

@mcc
in reply to Jef Poskanzer

mastodon - Link to source

EVHaste

@jef I feel like “engagement” is chasing the wrong thing anyway, right? You mentioned getting more of it here, like quantitatively, and that’s excellent, but (maybe it’s just me) I’ve also noticed the quality of conversation is higher here.

And I’d way, way rather have one person in my network that I can have an interesting discussion with, then five thousand that press like and move on.

So that seems like a great trade twice over.

@Jef Poskanzer
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

Ivan Sagalaev

I think it's not really about journalists, but about people who felt they were famous, and here they suddenly are not. So they perceive it as a problem that the platform is ill suited for pumping one's celebrity status. It's not enough for them to just talk to people, as you say. They would like to talk *onto* people and expect the platform to amplify that.

millennial fulcrum reshared this.

in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

secretsloth

there are probably a lot more journalists than I realize on here, but I'm in my little happy place being silly and talking about crafts and being a swamp weirdo and I just know them as my fellow gremlins. I don't know if it's entirely comparable, but I have bought lots of art, books, games, etc from folks I know here, it's not influencer status that matters, it's being part of a community and being a person. Those people actually pay attention and care. It means something.
in reply to EVHaste

mastodon - Link to source

millennial fulcrum

well put.

the way I see it, it is not even about "journalism" it is about the for profit model that journalism is subordinate to.

for profit agendas belong in a a for profit ecosystem. the corporate owned social media gaggle that enables its agenda.

for profit agendas in a for people environment fail. and they know it. so they call our for people environment "hostile" because to their minced up viewpoint it is hostile.

the people talking of courting them are just being silly.

⇧