Yesterday, designer Caryn Vainio put pen to paper about the unforeseen passing away of a friend she was in touch with via Facebook. Before the death of her friend, he made a status update on his stay in the hospital. However, Vainio didn’t see the message, despite consistently reading all the post visible on her news feed in sequential order.
Mutual friends did not recall seeing the post, also “Not only did I lose a friend, some of us are dismayed that we never knew, and we do not know if he KNEW that we did not know,” she wrote. “In the era of online interactions that social media corporations claim to simplify in a positive way, this feels improper.”
Vainio’s story inverts a common grievance about Facebook unintentionally inserting agonizing memories into people’s news feed. In this instance, she’s trying to say that, Facebook did not put forward a negative post when it was absolutely vital. The platform deduced what a user felt like doing with some highly private information, and chose wrongly.
However, do we actually want a Facebook that constantly guesses right?
It’s hard to say why somebody would not see a Facebook post. Vainio trusts that because her friend did not post numerous status updates, Facebook felt his posts were less significant.
Detailed algorithm guides have an opinion that “relevancy” is being determined by numerous factors, which includes how often you have been in contact with an individual, and how much engagement a post gets.
The “Most Recent” categorization method is thought to decrease the effect of this algorithm, but even at that, it is not clear whether you are viewing all posts or just a Facebook-preferred subset.
Facebook Guessed What Its Users Wanted, And Chose Wrongly
Facebook’s assurance is that you don’t need chronological categorization because it will discover and display the most vital information. Furthermore, one individual told Vainio that any post about decent friends in medical distress “warrants top billing on any news feed.” Meaning that Facebook should live up to its rhetoric.
But there is something very bumpy about treating Facebook like an important-life-event panic option determining what creates a personal or close friend emergency.
Vainio, together with several other people, recommends a more candid option with her thread: Facebook ought to make it easy for one to see the entire feed of their friends’ posts, just like Twitter does. However, for lots of individuals, who may have hundreds of friends and lots of “Liked” pages, there may be better options.
There is huge value in tools that allow us to sort through data, from an outdated network of gossipers to a succession of Twitter lists. And Facebook provides its own, Friend Lists, where one has the ability to add groups of individuals and explicitly take a look at their messages.
According to Vainio, Facebook can supplement older means of preserving friendship. The best method to do that is to assist users in understanding its resolutions — instead of making them feel like they are at the mercy of a cagey algorithm.