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

[jorgecandeias@mastodon.social]

@taylorlorenz Well, for me it's quite simple, really.

On other networks, I feel manipulated by algorythms that may or may not have hidden agendas (but somehow it seems to me they always end up having them, sooner or later).

Here, I don't.

And that's absolutely freeing.

[mastodonmigration@mastodon.online]

@futurebird @benroyce @taylorlorenz

Ants are a big selling point.

Don't forget ants .

[robotbrain@uwu.social]

@taylorlorenz Social media is too important to leave in the hands of one of the billionaire assholes that can shadowban or kick you off with a whim if you annoy them or go against one of their pet causes.

There's no black box algorithm that the billionaires can nudge to affect your thinking or mood (as Facebook admitted experimenting on us with)

You're not held hostage to network effects after enshittification.

They're not trying to monetize your outrage and misinformation.

[ncw413@mastodon.social]

@taylorlorenz As an American it is safer for me, also I get to see more of the world than just U.S.

[lauerhahn@sfba.social]

@mastodonmigration @futurebird @benroyce @taylorlorenz Come visit Fedi, we have ants and grandmas!

[vlrny@disabled.social]

@taylorlorenz I like the ability to community build. Like a mesh of relationships and connections I am a part of, as opposed to the influencer-follower paradigm of commercial social platforms.
Toots are little touches that connect, not commodities to be consumed.

[texan_reverend@kind.social]

@taylorlorenz
Algorithm-free chronological feeds.

Ad-free.

Ability to follow hashtags and have those posts show in your Home feed which can foster communities.
(On many but not all Fediverse software)

No billionaire data extraction or "features" just to please investors.

-No single entity can decide to shut it all down. Even if specific servers end up closing, users can migrate.

It can be messy or have issues, but there are often community-driven fixes or alternatives created.

[suzannealdrich@hachyderm.io]

@taylorlorenz its just like having your own website, except it’s your own social media.

[too_little_caffeine@dotnet.social]

@taylorlorenz No censorship. No paranoia that comes with wondering whether your posts are being suppressed. No algorithm changes that limit your reach.

[n_dimension@infosec.exchange]

@taylorlorenz

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;

Introducing the Fediverse a New Era of Social Media

The Fediverse explained in 4 minutes: watch now to discover a whole new world of social media, where privacy is respected, users are empowered, and Big Tech has no say. An Italian film maker Elena ...

Channel 44 (peertube.c44.com.au)

[mastodonmigration@mastodon.online]

@taylorlorenz

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.

[mastodonmigration@mastodon.online]

@lauerhahn @futurebird @benroyce @taylorlorenz

Don't tell then about all the cats. Let's keep that a surprise.

[too_little_caffeine@dotnet.social]

@taylorlorenz Stability. When centralized services go offline, everyone goes offline. On the fediverse, only those on a downed instance suffer and they can make a backup account on a different server if necessary.

[qkslvrwolf@mastodon.social]

@taylorlorenz I mean I, a random person, got to talk to a sitting US rep today, despite not even being his constituent, which is one of the things people love about social.

Works here to.

[too_little_caffeine@dotnet.social]

@taylorlorenz Identity and authority. If our public services or even brands were to set up their own instances on domains that they control then they are incredibly hard to spoof.

If a post comes from a handle at news.brandName.com or social.service.gov then you know it's official.

[msbellows@c.im]

@taylorlorenz I compare it 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.

[alan@mindly.social]

@taylorlorenz Just one sentence: It's immune to the influence of billionaires, and resistant to the influence of politicians and state actors.

Subsequent sentences can enumerate the faults of a centralized approach, many of which are now painfully evident.

[utopiarte@tupambae.org]

@ncw413

You mean to be able to choose an instance outside the US?

@taylorlorenz

[rainer@socialbc.ca]

@taylorlorenz I've found that smaller digital coops such as socialbc.ca and cosocial.ca give users opportunities to actually connect with real world people in their communities, and to have a collaborative process for making large decisions (e.g. de-federation, server policies, adding extra services like Pixelfed, etc)

[utopiarte@tupambae.org]

offtopic @futurebird

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