
Instagram is switching its feed from chronological to best posts first - talsi
http://techcrunch.com/2016/03/15/filteredgram/
======
zippergz
I'm not inherently opposed to a smarter order, but I feel like it (at least in
the case of Facebook and Twitter so far) breaks a fundamental part of the use
case for me. I check in every so often, and want to scroll back to the last
post I saw, so I can know I saw everything. When it is sorted non-
chronologically, this is impossible. I see the same thing multiple times
because it's sorted near the top, and I miss some stuff completely because it
gets sorted to the bottom.

Also, I'm not sure what signals they're using to rank posts. I could imagine
using likes and comments, but I don't think that would accurately identify the
posts I most want to see. For example, I follow a couple of local restaurants
who post specials and similar things on Instagram. I never "like" or comment
on those; it seems pointless (I use those actions to communicate with my
friends on their posts). If you use that signal, those posts which I _always_
want to see will get pushed to the bottom. I'm not sure what other data they
have to use.

~~~
eigen-vector
> I check in every so often, and want to scroll back to the last post I saw,
> so I can know I saw everything.

I am on the same boat. I'm not sure how they don't see the contradiction in
pushing mobile more and more at the same time ignoring the problem that their
default newsfeed is stale. They still have the option to switch between 'Most
Recent' and 'Top Stories', but it defaults to 'Top Stories' which wasn't the
case a while back -- it used to default to whatever I last chose.

Now I don't check Facebook that often mainly because there is nothing new, and
its always the same handful of people I am forced to engage with.

------
ryanolsonx
Why do all of these social media companies ruin feeds like that? It would be
fine if there was a seperate tab for 'best'.. I want to see things as they're
posted. No fancy algorithms.

~~~
JohnTHaller
Because the majority of social media users subscribe to more people/companies
posting more things than the user could ever possibly read. Rather than users
being overwhelmed with noise, getting frustrated, and possibly logging in
less, social media companies come up with a way to show them enough content to
keep them engaged and happy (and visiting the site/using the app) as long as
possible.

~~~
WalterSear
If that was the real reason, then facebook wouldn't revert from
'chronological' to 'best' every time I visit the site.

The sorting algorithm is for the benefit of facebook and advertisers - and not
necessarily by making me spend more time on facebook.

~~~
AJ007
Here is some speculation on my part, perhaps totally incorrect.

The three social platforms with non-chronological timelines now: Facebook,
Twitter, Instagram, may all be seeing diminishing engagement from critical
demographics (16-21.) Users log in less, so by "rewarding" them with the
stickiest post when the do happen to log in, it appears to increase the
retention of those cohorts.

Power users are following/friends with a _lot_ of other users. If 1,000 -
2,000 people are followed there is a lot of noise. This also presents
opportunities to completely bury the less sticky content, which also results
in increasing ad revenue from publishers who got addicted to the free traffic
(with "sticky" ads being rewarded with cheaper clickthroughs.)

The chronology complaint is interesting because reddit & hacker news have a
similar sorting algorithm (voting, but with other complexities thrown in.) You
log in, look, and log off. A compulsive user may check hourly.

There are definitely problems with dynamic sorting. Noisy producers may become
more noisier because less of their stuff is being shown. Other users may not
bother posting at all because they don't expect anyone to see what they
posted. That audience is going to feel comfortable if another platform offers
them a place they feel they are being heard.

Whatever the numbers show right now, the longer term retention cohorts have
yet to be seen by anyone.

Despite monster ad revenue I am not convinced that Facebook has made a "slam
dunk" on social media and will be the last man standing.

------
dkarapetyan
This makes sense. Gotta wean people off chronology to sell them the "best"
ads.

~~~
nissimk
I believe the algorithmic ordering is intended to optimize other variables
such as "time on site," because if you stay longer they can show you more ads.
It seems like the conspiracy stuff would be much harder to actually do, like
manipulating the content to influence you to click on more ads.

~~~
Jordrok
Maybe "conspiracy" is too strong a word, but I have no doubt that the key
motivation behind all these algorithmic changes is to boost ad metrics rather
than to better serve the users.

(Free services, users, products, etc)

------
ineedtosleep
I knew something was up when they removed the time since the item was posted.
This change will just make me unfollow the bigger users that I follow and
check them manually.

------
spike021
I'm curious what data all of these companies are using to determine that it is
better to identify posts by algorithm as "the best" rather than simply showing
everything in chronological order.

I thought Twitter originally said several weeks ago that they would introduce
the new feed and then let the user choose to use it or not. So when it first
started I thought I opted-out. Just the other day on twitter.com I was shown a
list of "best posts" that I needed to close, and then another click to say I
didn't like seeing that section.

Even if somehow finding which posts/tweets are "the best" is helpful, I don't
doubt that some users prefer chronological order.

It's really disappointing, but then I guess it comes down to the issue of
using a free service- in the end they get to choose how it's run and not me.

~~~
minimaxir
Keep in mind that Instagram is owned by Facebook. So expect the same methods
Facebook uses to rank content, and consequently expect to see the same
"tricks" that marketers use to exploit EdgeRank. (e.g. emotionally-charged
linkbait, content-theft-and-reposting)

------
gedrap
I can totally see genuine reasons for that. Feed is a huge part of the
product, and you want to control that (which means controlling UX). You don't
want to let things go out of hand. Some of us feel like, well, we can control
it ourselves by unfriending/unfollowing/unliking things we don't like. That's
true. But we shouldn't forget that we can't apply this assumption to the whole
active userbase of Facebook/Instagram. Many many of their users won't bother,
or aren't even aware of it.

It's kind of odd seeing all frustrated comments about how it's just about ads
and etc. Well, duh, they are a business, not a charity.

The only problem with it is if they disable an ability to switch back. But,
again, I can see reasons for that. It might be that they ran some experiments
and some that people switch to chronological and then they happen to be less
engaged over the time because their chronological, raw feed happens to suck
big time.

~~~
RickS
> we can control it ourselves by unfriending/unfollowing/unliking things we
> don't like... But we can't apply this assumption to the whole active
> userbase of Facebook/Instagram.

Perhaps _that_ is the UX challenge companies like these should be pursuing?
One of the unfortunate side effects of the valley's growth fetish is that
features like "make it easier to break connections" get sharply deprioritized.

I naively dream of a world where products teach the masses "it's easy to
settle only for quality, and it's okay to stiffarm the other noise that
clamors for your attention"

------
nikanj
They too have noticed that having a feed of n% stale posts and 100-n% new
content is more likely to addict you. A skinner box is a powerful device, and
you don't get addicted nearly as easily if you get the reward every time.

------
jeremy_k
I really hope they have an option to switch it back to chronological. I tend
to check Instagram at the end of the day and just scroll back until I see
things from the previous day, then I know I've seen everything. I don't follow
too many people so it only takes a few minutes.

~~~
TheLogothete
Then you will see everything. I have a facebook profile with very few friends
and relatively few liked pages.

I see every activity, including comments and even likes.

------
benchtobedside
Serious question: Does TechCrunch receive any payment for these types of
articles?

On the face of it, the article fails to address any of the concerns raised
throughout this thread / elsewhere on the internet.

------
grandalf
Arguably this is Facebook's most important secret sauce, so it makes sense to
try it with IG. I'll be curious if it sticks or if they revert back to a
chronological feed.

------
dang
Discussed a couple days ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11293705](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11293705).

------
drops
I want to get off this ride.

------
gdulli
Twitter is ruining itself the same way.

------
EC1
Welp time to stop using Instagram. Patiently awaiting a competitor.

