I’d hope people wouldn’t intentionally pick the political extremism feed if they had any other option (although it’s hard to say).

▲

iamnothere an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I will note that political extremists can have more interesting content at times, and it’s good to see what they are up to in case it will affect you. They also sometimes surface legitimate stories that are kept out of the mainstream press, or which are heavily editorialized or minimized there. But you definitely have to view all sides to gain an accurate view here, it would be a mistake to read only one group of extremists. And it’s almost always a mistake to engage with any of them.

▲

tarxvf 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

From where I'm sitting, it seems obvious people do exactly that.

	▲	mikepurvis 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		"It's the most interesting one!" For a related example I was talking with a colleague recently about how we had both (independently) purchased Nebula subscriptions in an effort to avoid getting YouTube premium and giving Google more money, but both felt the pull back to YouTube because it is so good at leveraging years of subscription and watch history to populate the landing page with content we find engaging. If even two relatively thoughtful individuals choosing to spend money on a platform with the kind of content they'd like to choose to watch can't seem to succeed at beating an engagement-first algorithm, I'm not sure how much hope normies would have, unless it's the real issue is just being terminally online period, and the only way to win is simply not to play.