Wednesday, September 17, 2025

My Bluesky

 Recently, there’s been another wave of think pieces arguing either that BlueSky is dying, or that BlueSky is thriving but rotting away liberal discourse, or somehow paradoxically doing both at the same time. Both Nate Silver and Noah Smith have recently weighed in, along with many other names I don’t keep up with (if I decide to discuss them, I'll link to them. In the mean time, they can get their own clicks).

Looking through these pieces, it strikes me that the social platform they describe doesn’t look much like the one I check in with once or twice a day. Perhaps this is on me. It’s entirely possible that my experience with and approach to BlueSky is grossly unrepresentative. But even if so, I thought it might be informative to explain what my feed looks like and what I use it for.

For those of you who haven’t used a microblogging site, most (all?) generally give you the option of either seeing posts from people you follow or from a list generated by some algorithm. I have a hard rule to only use the former. That means the posts and reposts I see are coming from fewer than 20 people, all of whom I know to be worth listening to. A little over a third of them are tech reporters or professionals focusing on some of my fields of interest such as AI, transportation, and robotics. The next biggest group are econ and business writers mostly associated with Kai Ryssdal and Marketplace. The list is rounded out by some journalism critics and a couple of personal acquaintances.

The majority of the posts I see cite articles, often but not always accompanied by some kind of comment, either in the form of a preface or a reply. When the source being cited is unfamiliar to me, I take a few moments to vet it, but most come from places like The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal, Reuters, etc.

The result is basically a curated and annotated news feed provided by a small group of distinguished journalists, technology experts, and business reporters.

Is this a broad, representative, unbiased cross-section of the news? Of course not. Josh Marshall, James Fallows, Ed Zitron, and Catherine Rampell are going to recommend stories that reflect their distinct interests and viewpoints. Certain topics will feature much more heavily in my feed than they do on the front page of The New York Times, and vice versa. This is not a bad thing. One of the reasons I follow the people I do is because I have come to trust their judgment and insight, and because they are highly knowledgeable in fields that are important to me. That’s something I can no longer say about the editorial boards of most major news organizations.

Of course, this is not the only place I get my news. I subscribe to the LA Times, listen to All Things Considered, check CNN (mainly for the business section—Allison Morrow is definitely someone you should be reading), and I keep an eye on the other major papers. For the most part Bluesky complements rather than supplants my news consumption and I feel better informed for it and certainly better informed than if I were using what remains of Twitter instead.

4 comments:

  1. Mark,

    I go on Twitter and Bluesky to post links to our new blog posts every day. I also use these services when following links from other sources, such as from your blog. So my experience with them must be different from most users'.

    That said, I'll share my impression, which is that Twitter and Bluesky seem much different. When I'm sent to a Bluesky post and click through, I will see some small discussion. When I'm sent to a Twitter post, or even when I just go on to Twitter to post links to our blog, I'm overwhelmed with ads, racist posts, and videos of weird things like people getting stuck on escalators or home improvement tips. I find all of that annoying but perhaps Nate Silver and Noah Smith enjoy these videos or, even if they don't personally enjoy them, they like the idea that when they go on Twitter they'll see weird shit that they would otherwise not be exposed to?

    By comparison to Twitter's overwhelming feed of ads, promotions, and homemade videos, I guess that Bluesky can seem kind of boring and tame.

    It could well be that you're right that Bluesky is a better source of information about the news, but it could also be that online commenters such as Silver and Smith are exposed to so much news from other sources that they don't see the value added for them.

    As I said, I don't regularly get information from either of those sources, so this is just my guess based on my limited experiences and what you wrote above.

    Andrew

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Andrew,

      Historian Juan Cole‬ recently said "When I talk about fish on Bluesky, people ask me questions about fish. When I talk about fish on Twitter, people threaten to murder my family because we’re Jewish.”

      twitter was having quality issues even before Musk. Since then his politics and even more importantly mismanagement have destroyed the site. When most of your likes, follows and replies come from pornbots...

      Pre-Elon, I used twitter like I use bluesky now, though it was never as good. It was designed to discourage people from just linking to articles since that sent people off the site. Bluesky works better as a curated news feed.

      Delete
    2. As for Silver and Smith, part of it is that they're more interested in the social part of social media, but I think the bigger part is that the majority of people here are critical of them and they really don't like that.

      It's not, as they have claimed, a left/right issue. Bluesky is made up of people who were willing to walk away from a familiar platform with lots of friends and followers mainly because they wanted nothing to do with Elon Musk. They are almost uniformly upset about the direction the country is headed, particularly with respect to rule-of-law and foolhardy policies and they tend to be angry with institutions that they see as complicit, or at least negligent.

      Is that an unhealthy monoculture or a realistic starting point for debate? I'd say the latter, but there are plenty of places where those who ddisagree can have their say.

      Delete
  2. So it functions like RSS. Judging from the sample of my readers, it seems like RSS is alive and kicking. Apparently, they follow me from an RSS reader.

    ReplyDelete