Skip to main content


I’ve been asked on TV hits and interviews lately to explain why decentralized social media is better, especially re: Mastodon.

How would you explain the benefits of a platform like Mastodon and the fediverse to someone in just a few sentences? How would you make the argument that platforms like Mastodon allow for more free expression than big tech controlled apps?

Would love to hear people’s thoughts! Trying to make my arguments most effective

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

You own your timeline. Like the early days when social media worked.
This entry was edited (1 day ago)
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

The most concise way I describe the difference between commercial algorithm based platforms versus the fediverse.

In the former, you are presented with the illusion of a town square, it propagates content based on spectacle and “engagement”

In the latter, people are the algorithm as members of distinct communities, moderated by real people.

1/2

This entry was edited (1 day ago)
in reply to GhostOnTheHalfShell

Centralized, commercial and algorithm based platforms are centralized command and control platforms.

The fediverse is a constellation of everything from individually hosted servers to the larger instances like mastodon dot social, and everything in between.

I would ask people to consider where do you think the greater liberty resides?

We have seen the kind of censorship that emerges on all of the large commercial platforms. It’s not possible in the fediverse.

2/2

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

To answer this, we should first understand why people don’t think it makes sense. Someone I know that dislikes big business, and uses X said: “I struggle to understand the basics of a decentralized social network, it seems oxymoronic except for extreme nerds”.

Take that as you will, but hopefully it is useful feedback.

in reply to Movie2468

@Movie2468
I would like to suggest then that they struggled to understand a market based economy or democracy
in reply to GhostOnTheHalfShell

@GhostOnTheHalfShell
I would agree. That’s why I left the snippet about big business and the use of X. Makes no sense.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

Mastodon is the anti-influence platform

On the social web we are
- free from the influence of megalomaniacs or any one person
- free from the influence of VCs and profit motivations
- free from the influence of algorithmic manipulation

Plus as a bonus, you can follow a friend's "Instagram" from your "Twitter" account ✨

#Fediverse #Mastodon #SocialWeb

This entry was edited (1 day ago)
in reply to hannah aubry

@haubles that first one really isn’t true though. The fediverse has harmful parasocial and group dynamics just like every other social space. And the concentration of power in instance admins sure adds to that.
in reply to Æ.

@aesthr
I take your point, but as you say: that’s a people problem not a technology problem. that is true of people wherever they form groups, on and offline. The fediverse is different because unlike other social networking platforms, you can vote with your feet if you find yourself in a social space that doesn’t suit you anymore, by leaving and taking your followers and followings with you.

There’s certainly more we can do as a community (and as the Mastodon org) to make our technology more resilient to toxic human dynamics. One thing we want to do is make it a lot easier for anyone to host a Mastodon instance, so if you can’t find a space that suits you, you can make your own. And we’re working on that this year! Another thing we’re considering (but is not on our roadmap right now) is adding post migration, which will make it a lot easier for people to pick up and leave when a space doesn’t suit them anymore.

We’re not trying to “fix” people here, but we are trying to make technology that is resilient to our worst habits and impulses instead of actively exploiting and compounding them. How do you think we should try to address this?

@Æ.
This entry was edited (1 day ago)
in reply to hannah aubry

@haubles it's true that you can move instances when you want, but that's also a very clunky process that puts a lot of people off. and then there's the whole anxiety over losing connections because of how instances are or aren't federating with each other. So I don't think "you can just move" is as simple as people often claim it is.

And it's not just an issue of having to move instances. The relationship people have with their admins can also be a very unhealthy parasocial one.

in reply to Æ.

@haubles I think this is very much a problem caused by the low level design of the fediverse. The way instances work in ActivityPub leads to a few people in powerful positions and that's very much an effect of the technology, not a purely social one.
in reply to Æ.

I see instance/account as analogous to a landlord/tenant relationship. The single-user instances, I suppose are the homeowners. Self hosting costs money. It's small money, but it's money. I think the emerging wireless mesh networks have the right network topology but unfortunately have various proprietary softwares and firmwares in the stack, but it seems exciting, possibly more exciting than the fediverse.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

don't appeal to high mindedness

sell it

- no ads

- choose a server that fits your style, no one-size-fits-all straightjacket

- zero privacy defilement

- immunity to some racist edgelord techbro coming in, buying the thing, and turning it into bigot and ignorance paradise

reshared this

in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩

@benroyce I would add

- I only see who I explicitly follow (no feed stuffing and manipulation).
- I can migrate to a new home seamlessly with low friction
- as each server sets its own policies, there is no risk of a central, single, set of beliefs controlling everyone.

in reply to Donald Clark

I think there's another side to the lack of centralized moderation too -- it removes a lot of the "too big to fail" mentality, and in doing so actually allows more moderation.

We've got Twitter over here producing and distributing CSAM, and so many people and institutions *still* won't block or remove links to Twitter purely because of its size.

So you do get more freedom here, but at the same time you get stronger and more fair regulation. Regulation designed for your community instead of for global politics. For example, I follow accounts that post pornography, which would never be allowed on corporate socials. Yet it's all hidden behind appropriate CWs and such. Meanwhile back before I left Facebook I was getting random unsolicited hardcore porn just popping up in my feed a couple times a week! They'd remove it eventually, but not before it popped up full screen while I'm standing in line at the grocery store or something...

This entry was edited (1 day ago)
in reply to SlightlyCyberpunk

@admin @dsc

on centralized #socialMedia, #moderation is just a cost center

why spend the money?

why squash #bigotry and #ignorance? it's a hassle

in fact, such accounts create drama, which drives eyeballs and clicks in outrage, thus increasing engagement, thus selling more ads

so they go "FrEe SpEeCh," a lying dodge

toxic as fuck. completely irresponsible

just another reason why corporate social media is and always will be rat poison and why everyone needs #mastodon

reshared this

in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩

@benroyce @rk @futurebird there's not only ants but literally every creature in the World (Fedi is particularly good for those interested in nature)

I've seen folk send pictures of lions etc that are sleeping in the main road (so everyone has to slow down and stop for them) as they live in countries where these are native, as well as just about every type of bug / snake / spider (folk do at least generally use CWs for those so others aren't scared if they have phobias), and nature scientists often post free links to whole full colour books of various creatures (I got one of all the snakes in Malaysia a few months back)

in reply to Alex@rtnVFRmedia Suffolk UK

you just hit upon *the* one, absolutely compelling selling point for mastodon:

"we have cat pictures"

boom, 1 million new sign ups

This entry was edited (1 day ago)
Unknown parent

mastodon - Link to source
Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩

@nikatjef

yes but there's a big difference between pesky reply guy bigots and ignorants, and a bigoted ignorant edgelord running the joint (elon)

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

Because independent app developers can add features to decentralized social networking that vastly enhance the experience. Both the ability to follow hashtags and timed mutes are absolutely genius and are the reason I'm not on Bluesky. What new, totally kicksss things are going to be created for the Fediverse next week?

Lorraine Lee reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

There are no ads.
There are no bots*
There is no secret algorithm controlled by strange billionaires and/or creeps trying to push agendas**
It's really fun and interactive and you meet great people, real individual people.

*Ya'll are such nerds you are going to bring up the good bots that we made and like, but you know exactly what I mean by this.
**ant propaganda doesn't count I'm not that rich either

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

I get why they call it a "decentralized network" but that description was kind of a turn off for me before I came here because I thought you were trapped in a little server with a few dozen people and what's the point of that?

The power is decentralized but the communication need not be. You can talk to anyone from any community. You can have all of those fun instances of cross pollination when different communities intersect.

The more the fedi grows the better this gets.

reshared this

in reply to myrmepropagandist

@futurebird

Apparently the mastodon team at FOSDEM had a really killer slogan for promoting the Fediverse : "My friends are not for sale".
Mic drop, really - what more is there to say ?

(though, depending on the audience, "Seize the memes of production, join the fediverse !" can land well too)

@taylorlorenz

in reply to myrmepropagandist

offtopic @myrmepropagandist

Or most of us are at least muted by @Taylor Lorenz, or mastodon is broken, or on her page on mastodon.social only show up the replies by people she follows.

in reply to myrmepropagandist

@myrmepropagandist

Visiting her toot on mastodon.social itself, there are quiet a few answeres visible.
If I remember well, the comments by this profile still showed up in her last toot a few days ago that mentioned tictoc.
(perhaps I shouldn't have pointed out indirectly to another commenter that she never answeres to anyone)

The comment by this profile, including some mindmaps about the fedi, was shared by another profile located on mastodon.social, so in any case I guess it's only muted by her. I suppose blocks wouldn't federate at all.

in reply to utopiArte

@utopiarte

She's a pretty popular journalist who is at least interested in this place.

Eventually if someone never seems to comment people stop paying attention to them, well at least I do.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

"Nobody controls the network. It's like email. If GMail loses their mind and starts inserting Republican propaganda everywhere, you might have to switch to Hotmail, but you can still use email. You can still email the people you used to email. It's not like you have to keep using GMail hating it more and more every day because this one single company is the only way you can email anybody."
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

some points

You aren't being manipulated by the platform or coerced into impulsive behaviour, although you can still trap yourself into it.

It's often a bit of a mess but it's "our mess", the sense of ownership has some legitimacy.

It only dies when people don't want it any more, not when investors want their payday.

The "low virality" means anyone is as big a deal as anyone else.

It's slower, but it's also more relaxed.

Being bad for marketing has its upside.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

The open social web brings the same benefit the open web once did: nobody owns it, so nobody can take it away. On centralized platforms, your speech exists at the pleasure of a private entity's business model — they can change the rules, throttle your reach, or shut you down overnight. The fediverse puts that power back in your hands: you own your presence, you choose and build your own community with no intermediaries, and no single entity can pull the plug on you, or them.

Mastodon Migration reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

No corporate overlord mining your data and then using it to dictate what's in your feed.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

On the old centralized platforms, everyone's in the same building with the same landlord, if the landlord is shitty (of course they are) everyone suffers. On decentralized media, there are tons of buildings with different landlords, and you can even build your own house. If your landlord sucks, you move.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

I like Jefferson’s phrasing: “it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my arm” Technology that is not working actively to harm me and my loved ones is very appealing to me.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

as a platform it is not and can never be adversarial or extractive to you as a user, the way twitter, Facebook, instagram, TikTok and others are or will be.
in reply to Ben

Certainly non-adversarial data export was a distant memory before I found the fediverse.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

Let me give this a try from a non-admin perspective.. 🤔

The Fediverse is a place on the internet where you can still meet interesting people from all over the world. Instead of uploading your contacts and following the same people over and over, on the Fediverse you discover new interests, info, help and support and everything you need in a HUMAN social network!

Sorry if it's a little long but im sure you can make something out of it! 💕

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

I just think it's great that you can get together with a few of your friends and run a Mastodon server for a few bucks a month.

Together, you are an independent entity, you set your own rules, but you are also part of something bigger, you can connect with many communities and individuals that the fediverse is made up of.

And that is pretty neat.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

we are in control- not the algorithms.
Other platforms thrive on conflict. Mastodon does not because people do not like it and it’s people who drive Mastodon timelines, not algorithms.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

On decentralized social media (like Mastodon) there's no Algorithm making sure you see the optimal toxic engagement bait.

All you get for posts is do people like it recently?

Its like the good old days before big tech had their Algorithms dialed in to make you as addicted as possible.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

let us know how we can help - we think a lot of people are pretty tired of having their data mined, conversations sold, and commercial companies injecting inauthentic content into their timelines. Maybe that’s just us? Happy to have a chat if it would be useful.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

Real quick off the top of my head I usually say the Fediverse is not controlled by Billionaires, can't be bought/sold or controlled, isn't filled with ads, doesn't track you or try to sell your information, isn't filled with Nazis (they are on their own servers and I never see them because they are blocked) and there's not an algorithm trying to feed me crap I don't want to see.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

It might be useful to reference the recent news on censorship on TikTok and BlueSky and Threads and Instagram.

I like my instance's rules, but if they ever change, I can keep my name and followers and just switch instances to one where I can continue as I have been. I don't have to worry about who owns the gated garden I'm allowed to interact in or how they feel about our demented dictator's whims from minute to minute.

It's more stable. It's also more international. I know what other people think around the world.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

It is all about choice. As a reader, I see only what the people I follow post, plus what they boost. Not what some marketing algorithm thinks I should see. As a writer, it is about being assured that my followers have a chance to see my posts. No guarantees, but I’m not paying to be seen.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

Nobody owns Mastodon, and there is no algorithm. In this era of algorithmic information warfare amplifying and suppressing everything, it is great to find a place where you are not constantly being manipulated by billionaire owners.

HeliosPi reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

Why not corporate #socialmedia?

1. Algorithm - pushes specific ideology, causes depression in young adults, distorts reality.

2. Owners propagandise their ideology (see above)

3. Certain voices are censored, just like in communist China. YouTube kicked off Aljazera news. TikTok US censors anti-#ICE sentiment, anti-genocide voices.

4. At election time, owners and the wealthy change the outcome of actual elections with social media.

If you haven't seen the outstanding #fediverse promo video by @_elena (4m)
Highly recommend it;

peertube.c44.com.au/w/tiwUDBzd…

reshared this

in reply to Wulfy—Speaker to the machines

@n_dimension @_elena what would have to happen , for a video like this one to be watchable in the sense, that it does not get interrupted every 1,5 seconds and doesn't need 10 min. to load in the first place?
in reply to Tamtam

@_elena @Tamtam

Sorry, shitty hosting, I'll get one from YouTube(!)
But only that's because I'm too sloppy to find other fediverse posts...

... Thanks for the feedback though, C44 peertube is running on a bottom tier VPS, it's an experiment

m.youtube.com/watch?v=YRJHIJy5…

in reply to Wulfy—Speaker to the machines

@n_dimension @_elena by the way, how do I find a peertube instance, that would host my channel and has better hosting than this example, we just saw?
Is it possible to make a living off of peertube? does anyone know anyone who does is? Like offering services on patreon and solely getting their audience from the fediverse, never posting on YT??
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

I compare Mastodon to email: no one can force you to watch ads before reading your email. No one can buy emails.com and make it so everyone only gets Nazi emails. Why? Because email is just a protocol. No one owns email, and there are thousands and thousands of servers.

Mastodon is like email for social media.

This entry was edited (10 hours ago)

M.S. Bellows, Jr. reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

Key item is: a platform not owned by billionaires, but by volunteers who aren't out to exploit you.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

I usually start by explaining the chronological feed with no publicity; then, that it's not a platform, but a software run in many different places, so there is no one owner; then, I circle back to the fact that there are no algorithms choosing what you see on your feed.
I have the feeling I'm not persuasive enough, so I would love to hear other strategies.
in reply to Diana Barbosa 🇺🇦🇵🇸

@diraquel
Yeah I low key hate the chronological feed. I wish I could customize it more and design my own algorithm so I didn't miss posts from people who don't post frequently, for example.

I will take it over an algorithm I can't control, however.

The big sell for me is no ads, including fake bot accounts that are just selling something or pushing something. Getting out from the bubble of influence of the worse people in the world.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

Bottom-up governance means it serves you, not the other way around, and it's not profit-driven so there's no incentive for manipulation of users in the form of ads and algorithms.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

tell them it’s just like bluesky, but all of their marketing lies are actually true here
in reply to JL Johnson

@User47
This could work.

But I feel like in a lot of ways people only view the internet as some mishmash of TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Netflix, and their banking app.

If you take away the algorithm shoving content down their throat they are TOTALLY LOST because they've literally never had to seek out things on their own that interest them on the internet before.

Those people are sadly never going to find a home on Mastodon as it currently operates. They physically don't have the pathways in their brain or a good enough understanding of what the internet is and how it works to "get" what Mastodon is offering.

in reply to Brett

I'm looking for a 3 foot tall 29 foot wide hunk of a man with 4 arms and more legs.
This entry was edited (1 day ago)
in reply to JL Johnson

I'm not sure I want the typical Blue sky user here on masto, do you? Bluesky is full of pompous blowhards using it as push media. They don't want engagement, they just want to broadcast self promotion.
This entry was edited (1 day ago)
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

The strongest pitch isn't "more free speech." It's "you get to choose who sets the rules." That's the real difference.

On Twitter, one guy decides what flies. On Mastodon, you pick your community or run your own server. Don't like the moderation? Move to another instance and keep your connections. Nobody pulls the rug out from under you.

The email analogy works best on TV: imagine if email only worked on Gmail and Google could nuke your account tomorrow with no appeal. That's centralized social media. The fediverse works like email already does. Pick any provider, talk to everyone. People live with a successful federated system every day without thinking about it.

No algorithm deciding what you see to maximize engagement. No ad machine that needs you angry to make money. Your feed is chronological, your data stays yours.

Honest caveat though: the "free expression" angle can backfire. Each instance has its own rules, and instances can cut each other off. Some corners of the fediverse are stricter than Twitter ever was. The difference is those rules are community-chosen, not handed down by a trust & safety team optimizing for advertiser comfort. That distinction matters, but it's not "anything goes" and pretending otherwise loses credibility fast.

If I had 30 seconds on TV I'd say: "The internet was designed so nobody owns it. Social media broke that promise. The fediverse fixes it. Pick your server like you pick your email provider, talk to the whole network, and if you don't like the house rules, you move. You don't lose everything."

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

decentralised social media is just the online equivalent of how people socialised offline.
It's like chatting with friends without being constantly interrupted by a salesperson trying to sell you something.

It's like being able to hang out a a party and choose who you spend time with, instead of the host constantly grabbing you by the arm, dragging you away from the person you were talking to and saying "here's a person you should be speaking to". And introducing you to some random person who immediately starts telling you everything that's wrong with your eating habits, your relationships, and your pets.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

it's not trying to steer society towards fascism, All the algorithmic social media chucks far right content at you now, The algorithms have been tweeked to prefer it. They also block searches for "democrats" for instance . Or "Trump dementia". The CEOs have adopted the strategie to bring up fascist regimes so they will not be regulated. Also: Trump has people on the board of meta now.
Open source is our only chance at keeping a democratic society.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

In theweeklymiscellaneous.co.uk/p… I end up describing it as:

Mastodon distributes power. No one admin has control over the whole network, and while an admin temper-tantrum can disrupt the network, it cannot engulf it in the way that it can engulf Twitter or Bluesky. Instead, it is entirely possible to avoid the tantruming admin while still being on Mastodon.

This changes the incentives involved. Mastodon is easier to run out of a furry’s basement, so there is no incentive to raise huge amounts of venture capital money (and be beholden to what venture capitalists want). If anyone wants to enshittify their Mastodon server, users will pack up and move servers - this makes Mastodon incredibly resistant to enshittification. Since advertising is a form of enshittification, this means Mastodon is entirely ad-free - and by extension, it is surveillance-capitalism-free, because why do all that spying if you can’t have ads?


(1/2)

This entry was edited (1 day ago)