Discussion
I’ve been asked on TV hits and interviews lately to explain why decentralized social media is better, especially re: Mastodon.
How would you explain the benefits of a platform like Mastodon and the fediverse to someone in just a few sentences? How would you make the argument that platforms like Mastodon allow for more free expression than big tech controlled apps?
Would love to hear people’s thoughts! Trying to make my arguments most effective
@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.
@taylorlorenz
* it's easier to "find your tribe" of people sharing common interests or geography - broad by server, narrow by following hashtags.
* Can only speak personally, as a woman I''ve experienced by far the least harassment/spam on Mastodon of any platforms and any abusive accounts reported have been dealt with very promptly. Feels 'safer' than other platforms.
@taylorlorenz
No American (or other) CEOs, nor algorithms, to tell you what to think !
It takes more work on Mastodon to find what you want, but it's not actually hard. You just don't spoon fed similar things once you view a category of content.
And once you get going, you will get the information you want in your feed, and are always free to explore to find (and instantly add) new content/interests.
But NO SINGLE ENTITY controls your content.
@taylorlorenz Billionaires don't own it, and they never can.
I reckon the federated nature allows each instance to balance the social media aspects appropriately:
- funding
- moderation
- connectivity
These are all determined instance by instance.
So if one finds a good instance that supports their style, and contributes $ to its upkeep, then it will provide everything one could want.
@taylorlorenz The open social web brings the same benefit the open web once did: nobody owns it, so nobody can take it away. On centralized platforms, your speech exists at the pleasure of a private entity's business model — they can change the rules, throttle your reach, or shut you down overnight. The fediverse puts that power back in your hands: you own your presence, you choose and build your own community with no intermediaries, and no single entity can pull the plug on you, or them.
@taylorlorenz - On the fediverse, you're not the product. The sucker product.
I tried to answer your two core questions, "benefits" and "freedom", but really struggled to answer the questions as you posed them. I think the reason I got caught up on those answers is your use of the word "Platform". And when the general public think of "Platform", they immediately begin thinking of all those monolithic platforms out there.
Calling it "decentralized" doesn't really help. It's not a particularly precise term, nor do most people really understand the technical and social trade-offs that it implies. And "most people" includes a lot of people on Mastodon itself.
And we regularly see people who are disappointed when they get here, because they are expecting Twitter and they are getting something significantly different.
I think I can answer your two questions, next toot, but I think they need to be framed correctly first... /1
What is Mastodon?
Mastodon is a miniature version of Twitter that anyone can host for themselves. You can host a copy for your friends, or a group of people get together and host a copy for their city or interest group or community.
What's special about Mastodon is that each of these miniature Twitters can talk to each other. So you can talk to people in other places from anywhere.
Benefits
When you sign up for an account, you are now a member of that community. You are not a User being fed an algorithm, you are a Member who gets to decide what you read and who you connect with.
Freedom
Because this is just software being run on your behalf, you are not beholden to the whims of some giant corporation. You and your community members are free to make your own community rules, to decide who you talk to. If you, personally, don't like some rule change, you can move to another community, or even start your own. You control big decisions. //
@taylorlorenz some points
You aren't being manipulated by the platform or coerced into impulsive behaviour, although you can still trap yourself into it.
It's often a bit of a mess but it's "our mess", the sense of ownership has some legitimacy.
It only dies when people don't want it any more, not when investors want their payday.
The "low virality" means anyone is as big a deal as anyone else.
It's slower, but it's also more relaxed.
Being bad for marketing has its upside.
- no ads.
- no ad tracking!
- no billionaire owner.
- no "responsibility" towards shareholders (read: line must go up)
- the different platforms interact!! You can follow someone's photo sharing account (say, pixelfed - "Instagram", kinda) from your Friendica ("Facebook," kinda) account. #interop is cool
@taylorlorenz it's not owned by billionairs, it's not owned by anyone. if more time, get to the community of communities thing, how orgs can own their content on it and not depend on others, and still be part of the network, as anyone else.
i think people focus too much on the added complexity, not enough on what this complexity buys us.
Looking to grow your income through smart trading? 📈
CaltexChain Trading Investment Company offers reliable investment opportunities with professional guidance.
If you’re interested in getting started or want more details, send us a message on WhatsApp:
+1 (804) 208-9874
@taylorlorenz Here's my best shot: https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/2025/11/03/Time-to-Migrate from which
1/2 ”Have you noticed that social-media products, in the long term, can’t seem to manage to stay fun and safe and useful? I have. But there’s one huge exception, a tool that’s been serving billions of us for decades, and works about as well as it ever did. I’m talking about email.
2/3 Why does email stay reasonably healthy? Because nobody owns it. Anyone on any server can communicate with anyone else on any other and it Just Works. Nobody can buy it and make it a vehicle for their politics. Nobody can crank up the ad density or make things worse to improve their profit margin.
@taylorlorenz
3/3 Mastodon’s like email that way. Plus it does all the Post and Repost and Quote and Follow and Reply and Like and Block stuff that you’re used to, and there are thousands of servers and anyone can run one and nobody can own the whole thing. It doesn’t have ads and it won’t. It’s dead easy to use and it’s fun and you should give it a try.
@timbray @taylorlorenz Plus one on the email analogy. Email is about as complicated as Mastodon. Email has its problems just like mastodon but it’s still a remarkably useful and resilient tool that no one company controls. I can email anyone from any email provider. I can’t say the same for social media.
@taylorlorenz "Nobody controls the network. It's like email. If GMail loses their mind and starts inserting Republican propaganda everywhere, you might have to switch to Hotmail, but you can still use email. You can still email the people you used to email. It's not like you have to keep using GMail hating it more and more every day because this one single company is the only way you can email anybody."
Install BT Free Social
Get the full app experience
