2026-01-05 08:28:05

Many centralized social platforms are currently facing the same dilemma: the algorithm's bias toward low-quality content (fake news, inflammatory topics, inappropriate content) is becoming increasingly obvious, resulting in high-quality creative and original content being de facto downgraded in visibility. In simple terms, the platform is effectively granting these poor-quality contents unlimited privileges.

The underlying logic is straightforward—any platform that relies on advertising and traffic monetization shares this root problem. Highly engaging, provocative content can boost dwell time and clicks, directly translating into advertising revenue. Serious, thoughtful original content often doesn't generate as much interaction as sensational topics. Therefore, from a business perspective, the platform's incentive mechanism itself is flawed.

This is also why the Web3 community has been emphasizing the importance of decentralized governance—user co-management, transparent rules, and anti-censorship mechanisms may break this vicious cycle of "traffic above all."

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

20 Likes

Reward
20
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ZKProofEnthusiast

· 2h ago

Algorithm feeding sh*t is truly amazing; high-quality content being buried has become the norm --- That's why I'd rather hang out on the chain; centralized platforms should have died long ago --- Traffic first = platform suicide, but they’re still playing with fire --- Web3 governance, we've been hyping it for so long, but where are the real implementations? --- Low-quality content = high engagement; this formula is way too common now --- Instead of complaining, why not vote with your feet? See you on the chain --- Transparent rules sound great, but in reality... it’s just another way to cut the leeks --- The lament of original creators: platforms simply don’t care how dedicated you are --- Can decentralized governance really save us? I remain skeptical --- Incendiary topics are unbeatable worldwide; it’s human nature, folks

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainNewbie

· 8h ago

To be honest, this is the original sin of centralized platforms—ruining the entire ecosystem for a bit of advertising revenue. Algorithms have been tamed by greed, and the old trick of bad money driving out good money keeps looping in Web2. Genuine content creators have long been exhausted; they still rely on Web3's incentive mechanisms for redemption. This issue can't be fundamentally solved unless we tear it down and rebuild. Centralization is like this— in an era where traffic is king, how much is a person's integrity worth? Wait, if that's the case, how do quality bloggers survive? They still have to rely on fan tips and community feedback. Without changing the algorithm, no amount of optimization is going to help; Web3's transparent rules are truly appealing. To be blunt, those platforms survive by creating conflicts and spreading rumors. So I no longer bother with the garbage generated by those traffic monsters.

View OriginalReply0

LazyDevMiner

· 8h ago

I calculated that being exploited by this algorithm all day isn't as good as just managing on-chain governance myself.

View OriginalReply0

MetaverseHobo

· 01-05 08:57

At the end of the day, the platform is just taking a cut, and we creators become mere accessories. We should really try things on the blockchain; at least we won't be manipulated by algorithms. Why is high-quality content always buried? It's all part of the platform's game. There's still hope for Web3; decentralized governance sounds great.

View OriginalReply0

NeverPresent

· 01-05 08:57

Algorithm poisoning has become the norm, and the issue of quality content being buried has long been tiresome. --- At the end of the day, it's still about money; platforms just rely on traffic. --- The transparent rules of Web3 sound great, but I'm worried it might turn into a new power game. --- So now I hang out in on-chain communities; at least the rules are hardcoded and no one can secretly change them. --- Centralized platforms are like drug addicts; once addicted, they can't stop. --- Instead of complaining, it's better to issue your own tokens and build your own platform—after all, it's all about a gambler's mindset. --- This problem can't be solved at all; as long as there are ads, the distortion will continue.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeNightmare

· 01-05 08:51

This algorithm is getting more and more outrageous. It's crazy that poor content can go viral. The traffic culture is driving high-quality creators crazy. No wonder everyone is thinking about shifting to the chain. That set of transparent governance in Web3 is indeed tempting, but it's still a long way from being implemented. Someone should have broken the deadlock long ago. If platforms keep doing this, a crash is inevitable. Algorithmic cancer. No choice but to change.

View OriginalReply0

OldLeekMaster

· 01-05 08:40

Uh... There's nothing wrong with that, but I don't think the Web3 approach is necessarily a silver bullet. --- It's not the platform's fault; frankly, it's a human nature issue. Traffic always chases stimulation. --- So what are people still fighting for on centralized platforms? --- That's why I switched to decentralized communities long ago. I'm tired of being manipulated by algorithms. --- Haha, ironically, Web3 platforms are now starting to play the same tricks. --- The key is that user governance sounds good, but in practice, who really makes the decisions? --- Really, high-quality content always loses out everywhere, and this problem can't be fixed. --- So do people still believe Web3 can save the world? LOL. --- Talking about algorithm issues a thousand times is useless unless you build your own platform. --- Anyway, I'm playing on both ends. Whoever gives the traffic, I post there.

View OriginalReply0