[orangepurple]

Dead Internet Theory (DIT)

TLDR: Large proportions of the supposedly human-produced content on the internet are actually generated by artificial intelligence networks in conjunction with paid secret media influencers in order to manufacture consumers for an increasing range of newly-normalised cultural products.

https://forum.agoraroad.com/index.php?threads/dead-internet-...

[stnmtn]

What products would this be in reddits case? I don't see what subreddits that show up on /r/all are secretly advertising.. The better explanation using Occams Razor is that optimizing for engagement metrics means that low-quality, broadly appealing shallow content simply is more popular

[orangepurple]

Low-quality, broadly appealing shallow content also drives away anybody interested in putting in effort

[stnmtn]

Which is a minority and not a demographic that the revenue team particularly cares about, sadly.

Also, anyone interested in putting in effort should unsubscribe from any sub that shows up on /r/all and find smaller communities; that's where the real value proposition of reddit lies.

[happythebob]

I spend enough time on Reddit that I think the bots excuse is overblown. I think there's just that many stupid people now who are too busy to think or read at a meaningful level. Social media by default encourages reaction (upvotes and quick comments) as opposed to reflection. Conservatives have been doing a much better job of reaching younger people imo the past ten years, too

[Tostino]

I think the phenomenon is explained by a little bit of A and a little bit of B.

The barrier to entry for internet communities has dropped like a rock over the last 10 years as smartphone usage has become ubiquitous. So you do have more average and below average intelligence (but still very real) people interacting online than ever before, by a wide margin from back in the mid 2000's.

I have seen the bot argument taken to the extreme by some when there was no indication it wasn't a person, so yeah it does get blown out of the water a lot of times just to try and shut down conversation. Even more so in political related discussions, people are so quick to call bot/shill on some topics, and I wonder how much of that has been influenced by the media narrative around the "Russian troll farms". One section of the population are entirely convinced that Hillary would have won if not for the bots/trolls, and use that to deflect from any other criticism of how she actually conducted herself / campaigned. Another section of the population looks at that argument as ridiculous, and dismiss bots/shill's as a delusion by the "other side" entirely.

[pixl97]

Eh, feedback loops exist here for sure.

Countless studies have shown the initial trajectory of a post dictates its upvote/downvote ratio over time. Bots commonly will ensure the first few comments dominate most of the threads views.

Conservatives are reaching younger people the same way candy companies reach kids. By feeding them a diet of sugar shit that's going to have massive long term negative consequences. "Nothing is your fault, hate all immigrants" is a great way to reach someone that can't get a job and wants to blame someone else. It's not going to get them a job, it's not going to fix their situation. Oh boy, but it does generate engagement.