Instagram chief Adam Mosseri has announced that Threads is now moving into a more independent phase, which could eventually see it separate itself from Instagram entirely.
Maybe.
Yesterday, Mosseri announced that:
Wow, people on Threads, which is an entirely different platform, facilitating an entirely different use case to Instagram, don’t want to follow the exact same accounts on both platforms. Who’d have guessed?
This has long been an issue with Threads, that it’s so closely tied to Instagram, which means that you often get recommendations of posts on Threads that are based on profiles you’ve interacted with on IG. Which can be annoying, because each platform is so different. The profiles that I followed on Twitter, for example, are nowhere close to the ones that I engage with on Facebook, and the same with pretty much every other app, and really, it’s somewhat surprising that Mosseri’s treating this like it’s a revelation of sorts.
Though it is also worth noting that Threads will still use your IG graph for post recommendations. Mosseri is only saying that it's removing IG-related recommendations from your onboarding experience, but it’s still looking to use what it knows about you from Instagram in building your “For you” feed. Which means that you’ll still get Instagram-related post recommendations there.
Which, in my opinion, and experience, is not the way that Threads should go, but then again, Threads has been able to grow so rapidly because of its linkage to IG. And Meta’s real interest is in the numbers going up, so it’s hard to argue that Threads might be on the wrong track as it continues to gain growth momentum.
Indeed, Mosseri also noted today that more than 15 million people have signed up for the app this month alone, with two weeks still to go. At that rate, if all of those new accounts become regular users, Threads will be on track to exceed X’s user count sometime in the first few months of the new year.
So while many people have criticized Threads’ content approach, especially its anti-politics stance, the numbers don’t lie. And even if the majority of those users are refugees from X, alienated by Elon Musk’s changes at the app, the data, at least right now, would indicate that Threads is on the right track.
Though it still feels like it has some refinement to go.
The problem with Threads is indeed Meta’s resistance to political content, while it still amplifies recommended content well behind time, which often makes your timeline feel stale, as opposed to having your finger on the pulse of the moment, as Twitter felt at peak.
As noted by Will Oremus, what it feels like is that Threads is trying to be “TikTok for Text”, where it seeks to boost engagement by showing you the most entertaining content, as opposed to the most relevant. But that’s not what a lot of people seem to want from a text-based social app.
But it is reflective of broader social media engagement trends, which has seen apps switch from highlighting content based on your social graph, to using algorithms to show you the most engaging, entertaining content, based on what their systems understand of your interests. TikTok sparked this shift, by demonstrating that algorithms are now smart enough to understand user interests, so users don’t actually need to follow profiles anymore, as the system doesn’t need your explicit input to understand what you want to see more of.
And that works on TikTok, where it’s all about showing you the most entertaining video clips, while it’s also worked for Facebook and IG. But Threads feels like it needs a more specific focus on real-time updates, and the most relevant posts in the moment, as opposed to what’s getting the most engagement.
Because using post engagement as a proxy means that you can only display content in retrospect, and that doesn’t work for breaking news. Neither does a restriction on “political” content, and it still feels like Threads needs to refine its balance on both elements if it wants to supplant Twitter, and become a new home for that type of activity.
Though that also assumes that that is Meta’s aim, which may not be correct. Meta has said that it is looking to take on X with Threads, but it’s also said that it wants Threads to be a “more friendly” version of that experience.
Which, again, points to that “TikTok of Text” approach, where, really, Meta wants all the engagement, but none of the issues that come with a more news-based approach, including more challenging moderation, increased risk of misinformation, concerns around manipulation, etc.
So really, it all depends on how exactly Meta wants to approach this. But it does seem like Bluesky, for example, is only gaining traction now because of Threads’ failure as a real-time news source, which was highlighted on Election Day.
And while Bluesky only has 15 million users in total, that’s still 15 million people that may well have been Threads users, had it gotten its approach right.
And it does feel like Threads is sitting on a major opportunity as a real-time news and information source.
X is now too biased in this respect, and offers no real protections around misinformation (Community Notes is not good enough in this respect), while Bluesky is too small, though as noted, it is growing. But right now, Threads has the best opportunity to become that real time news discussion space. But it will also require Meta to take on a level of risk in its approach.
In the wake of the election, I do think Meta will eventually change tack, and it’s interesting to see it taking the first steps in re-aligning Threads around its own, separate use case.
But that, really, is what needs to happen, with Meta putting more focus on real-time relevance versus light entertainment.
English (US) ·