It's a very real loss of the opportunity to share your gift, as well as (it seems), the work you've shared there and the community you've created there.
My heart goes out to you.
I will delete instagram too, I’ll miss the dog rescues. FB is more difficult. I hate it but live rurally and it’s the only place to get important local information like dangerous roads, police and local council announcements. That’s all I use it for. 😕
My personal opinion is that it justifiable to keep an account on these platforms so long as one does not provide them with the content that gives them value.
I considered removing almost everything on there…I only have a few family anyway and no one ever posts…but removing all remaining likes for pages, even local ones, and just having the bare essentials. Police, council, 2 community groups.
That's already a helpful gesture! Much like a community bulletin board in the church ante for a non-believer, you can still acknowledge its use and not condone where it is while working on supporting a platform more in line with your values.
I removed everything…posts, photos, likes. They didn’t make it easy and I had to do everything multiple times across app and webpage. Half the time I had error messages. Luckily I hadn’t posted much! Deleted instagram. It’s not much but what else can you do 🤷🏻♀️
It's a serious problem, and it hurts photographers more than viewers. But dismissing such a seismic shift, in these times, as a "political move" that could be happily ignored, defeats the good faith. It makes the need for alternatives even more urgent.
This argument presumes no other ways you could share. That's simply not true. Also, how would staying be a form of protest? The act of continuing to provide engagement for a private garden protests against what exactly? The whole sentiment reads as self-serving, not good faith.
I can't say I would respond, to be honest with you.
But if I were to, I guess I'd try to get across the idea that continuing to use it because the content is popular as a protest is similar to donating to the salvation army in protest of their LGBT stance
I'd say it's a bad faith argument. Your reasons cite specific policy that fails to moderate hate speech, harassment, and targeted discrimination, not politics or the result of an election. It's telling that the poster makes that leap.
You have the right to choose the environments you wish to be in.
The respect and reputation they themselves brought up is also based on your principles, which they are asking you to compromise for the sake of their convenience.
Let them know they are welcome to test the waters over here.
“staying in protest” is utterly meaningless, since by being there and sharing meaningful photos, you are contributing to the economic value of Facebook. other people have made the “election results” vs. platform action point
The intro to the letter irks me in separating 'education and awareness' from 'a political move'. Education and awareness IS political, especially in a climate of increasing misinformation and obfuscation of truth.
Your “protest” would still enrich Zuckerberg. It would keep instagram as the go to place to find information. But they make good points. There are no good answers. Act out of caring and try your best. Good luck.
You're not obligated to use your photography to provide content to a platform whose politics or policies you don't support. It won't be lost. It may find a new home! It just won't be there for Instagram to profit from.
Thank you for leaving Instagram. BlueSky is also free to this person and they can follow you here. Photos are better on BlueSky because it allows high-res, and we can reshare your posts freely.
I mean... if enough people leave, that sends a signal that intolerance is not tolerated. There's no signal if you don't leave.
Staying implies "I am ok with this bigotry" EVEN THOUGH it means people won't be able to "learn from you" or "be in community with you" or whatever else on Instagram.
The learning environment and community has been poisoned.
Staying because people want to learn despite the bigots is saying to the LGBTQ2S+ community that THEY don't matter and their ability to participate is irrelevant.
There are alternatives. Multiple photo sharing websites exist.
Zuckerberg didn't do this just b/c of the election, he's using the election as an excuse.
Meta's hostility towards minorities is ongoing. Staying and teaching the people who remain and insisting that's some kind of protest is a misunderstanding, because the people who are harmed are gone.
Also, as a Canadian witnessing this nonsense, this cannot be *just* about an election because there hasn't been one in ever nation where Meta operates.
And we all (if we bother to think) can remember Facebook's role in things like the Cambridge Analytica scandal and the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar.
Exploitation of the environment to drive engagement so users line up against each other across divisive issues and throw digital rocks is a pattern that repeats across a range of fault lines in society.
Facilitating/amplifying this for profit feels worse.
If you stayed, cover letter of protest over every photo. (They make a good point there.)
But, more and more, I think about the expression “meeting them where they are” in concert with the realization that we don’t NEED any of these places … That expression is about a physical and mental space.
If it were me*, the question becomes “am I reaching them?” is that my goal? How? Is that the point?
After a time, I finally realized, people stayed on Twitter for reasons. Why will Meta be any different? Not today, but eventually, the same will ring true.
These networks profit by keeping consumers engaged w/ content. If the incentive is to spread content without much filter (and even if harmful), it will continue. Complaining within the platform only fuels engagement and reinforces the mechanism. The real impact comes from cutting off their audience.
The entire argument is built on the presumption that one owes their labor (education is labor), on all platforms, no matter the harms those platforms perpetrate. This is untrue.
Also, as an educator, choosing where you interact is also informative to those who value your work.
1/2
You've explained very eloquently and succinctly why you cannot add value to that very harmful platform. If people of value leave these platforms the ones who remain will be those with an interest in what remains... largely speaking, they're not a good faith audience.
Thank you for the many excellent comments here. It helped me in thinking through it all, and you'll see that a number of your points made it into my response.
Unfortunately, the OP's response to me and another commenter suggests that you were also right about not-quite-as-good-faith-as-I-thought.
Unfortunately, while easy to spot, these folks are far too prevalent on all systems, major and minor. And they are good at exerting peer pressure. Too many fall others for it, then get recruited into pressuring others.
It doesn't matter. Retention reps recruit actual accounts to exert the same pressures using similar techniques. They whip their faithful into a frenzy and rally them to the cause. The end result is the same no matter if they're a Meta employee or not.
Like everyone else said it's not "the election results" it's the specific policy positions of the website. And how is it a "protest" to continue to provide a site with free content?
Part of the unstated assumption of leaving a platform is that others should leave it too. If someone is expecting (them or others) to continue to find your content there their unstated assumption is that folks shouldn't feel any reason to leave, and they should investigate that assumption.
I'm not leaving as a political protest b/c election results, i'm leaving b/c I think it's dangerous for my health to be there. I also think it's dangerous for everyone and you should leave. Letting photos would be akin putting you at harm.
It's obviously your decision but i strongly suggest to run
There is a "staying in a house when one know the people responsible for ventilation let you being slowly asphyxiated by gaz" example, but between Cali fires and Shoah I can't find a way to put it that isn't disastrous
It's a very cordial, reasonable argument and it's wrong, IG is not the only access point to info abt birds. I think ppl should take some responsibility for accepting that it's time to adapt instead of expecting ppl to stay on a hate platform. I used to use GeoCities and now I don't and life went on.
Staying enables, empowers, and enriches Meta and Zuck while they turn towards attacking marginalized groups. It implicitly condones that behavior and provides content for their ad sales.
The audience capture is the real problem. People don't quit because their loved ones, friends, etc are there. So you, quitting, will not make them follow. Bluesky's story illustrates that first we need an alternative, then parallel use, then people understand that they can quit the bad one.
We have given Meta too much power by concentrating almost all social media users on Facebook and Instagram. When creators stay, users stay, too. When creators leave for other platforms, it helps build a healthier social media ecosystem.
There are good reasons for people to stay on Instagram & Facebook: for small business owners, they’re almost always necessary to reach customers. Those owners have no choice if they want to stay in business, until we build better, widely used alternatives.
Users have legit reasons to stay, too: Meta products have the monopoly on many places’ local events information these days. Facebook is how my kids’ pre-K & kindergarten teachers communicate classroom happenings to parents. If we can leave, we should. But not all can leave entirely.
For myself, I’ve decided to stop posting on Facebook & Meta. Family/friends who want to see photos of life can text me. But I’ll still use them to find out about local events & follow local businesses until better options are available. Right now in my hometown, there are no other options.
imo, free speech has to cut both ways. those leaving meta’s platforms are just exercising that right to dissent and choose platforms that better reflect certain values. this argument isn’t wrong, but like… Bluesky is open and nothing preventing them from joining for that education :)
I disagree. It is wrong because it's not destroying a community or depriving people of knowledge and/or enjoyment. He's not deleting the works. He's just metaphorically changing the display stand. It's like saying you can't move art from one museum to another. Only worse because it's the internet.
"Photos can always be posted somewhere else; a company that is seeking ways to kill their fellow citizens with impugnity should never be supported by time or space if at all possible, and they need to know they are not the only arbiter of webspace."
It’s telling that they’re criticizing your move and not Meta’s. Also, you state clearly that you’re posting here, so you’re not depriving people of your work. I mean, I found you here and never saw you in ig.
i would say something like instagram is a tool and though i'll miss the connections i made here, i'm sure i can find another tool that will help me to continue to make the connections i seek https://bsky.app/profile/krupali.bsky.social/post/3lfhm3u3ohd2b
The argument may be in good faith, but it's specious because it makes the implicit assumption that Instagram is the *only* place where you could keep that information available. There are many alternative places which can be used without indirectly supporting Zuckerberg, so it's not either/or...
The argument is that by having one site it was easier for people to follow a number of writers & creators. While this is true there is a line in the sand. I think that Meta (and xTwitter) have crossed that one, at least for me.
The argument is fundamentally self-centered then since it actually ignores the psychological and material harm the actual Content Provider may suffer/experience as a result of staying
Unless they pay me a salary I do not have to provide anything to anyone. Ok, family and dependents, but we all understand this distinction, and I have been too long on social media & Usenet, as seen by me feeling the need to point that out specifically.
Sure, I understand the costs, but that's not exactly what the argument claimed; it claimed removal, not increased difficulty. A profile link to the New Place (whichever that may end up being) nullifies it.
The argument also uses the iffy "don't make it political" line. Most things are political...
I mean, not even really that. It's more true than it used to be because of how bad search is now, but in general there's not much difference between different sites and different webpages. And if you're relying on a bad app that's still not other people's fault or responsibility to correct.
"You seem to believe that politics is divorced from everyday life. It is not, and I'll protest politics I object to in the ways I can. It is indeed a shame that my photography will be accessible to fewer people, but that's on Meta, not on me.
Besides, "stay" isn't a protest, it's the status quo."
Something like: I’m happy that you find my photographs beautiful. I’ll find another means to share my photographs — one that values beauty over hate. For me, this issue is not political; it is moral.
If you're sharing your photos elsewhere, I think it's perfectly reasonable to tell them they're welcome to follow you elsewhere. No one is obligated to continue sharing on that platform.
its not the e lection results, its not supporting the slide to fascism, its seeing what these platforms will bcome& how this will affect democracy…we need fb & insta alternatives like bluesky is to twitter
Scientifically. Networks propagate signals depending on degree distributions and there are papers showing that in Meta's the spread is often due to few hyperconnected hubs. Ergo, 1. are you one of those hubs and 2. do you have the (mental) strength to push? No one needs be a hero for the sake of it.
I think the last sentence is wrong, misunderstanding how social media companies work.
There is no stay in protest, since Meta makes money off of your presence.
The choices are pretty much stay (& provide Meta with content) or leave (& deny Meta your content).
I see your response is an attempt to meet meta where it is at. Clearly they only care about engagement on the platform. You are showing them that their shitty decisions will reduce this (assuming others follow suit). Additionally, it may be that you no longer feel safe on the platform.
They aren't grasping the economic and political function of instagram and therefore your departure. Instagram makes money from attention to adverts. Meta is pivoting it to disseminating more information and hate to curry favour with and support the new regime.
You are depriving Meta of the attention and therefore $ and the bad political effects of the disinformation and hate spread. Your photos are not like things that guy encounters in a public gallery.
Totally. I love the climbing and surfing and skiing videos on there, as well as the bird photography. I guess I’ll have to find a new place to get my fix.
Here in the US, TikTok probably isn’t going to be it….
Tell them to join you and other birders at Pixelfed :) Ppl are grieving loss of community. It’s so nice they love your photos too. Reconstituting that community elsewhere will give them an opportunity to continue to participate somewhere that doesn’t feed the downfall of democracy.
@michellev.bsky.social I think pointed out that Bluesky or someone could start a new insta clone on the public AT protocol. It’s after all just microblogging with a compulsory image or video.
I think it's difficult to be educational on sinking ships. The target crowd leaves. Before it's too late, probably best to make a final post a teaching moment, which you did. I follow the sentiment, but being part of a bad thing hoping to improve it, doesn't make you less part of the bad thing...
I would answer first of all preventively as you did: you provided your Bsky handle. Secondly, if at all, by gently pointing out that freedom and respect for human rights does not come free: if simply adding an app on the phone is too much of a hassle for this person, then...Sorry no more characters
We treat electing our representatives like a chore, when for most of human history, our ancestors lived and died at the whim of the meanest, most violent, and/or richest man in the village.
Meta should burn to the ground and everyone leave for everything they're doing for more than a *decade* now throughout the globe
maybe pointing out the bloodbath and authoritarian regimes it helped might make your point across
That doesn’t read like an entirely good faith argument to me. I don’t think the rationale you posted hinges on the result of an election, it was about a policy change by the company than owns instagram. Assuming good faith though, I would invite them to wherever you intend to continue posting.
The internet is mostly open and mostly free. The one change I would encourage you to make is to tell people where they CAN find your content. Then it’s not “goodbye,” it’s “see yall over there”
Just reply with information about how to find you on other venues. Seems to me you're just disappearing from Instagram, not the world, not even the internet. You're right here (for example). Leaving Instagram at this juncture is •good•.
I think @thoughtfulnz.bsky.social's comment on leaving Twitter was quite applicable: he said that even if his individual work was doing good, he believed the platform was so awash in disinformation and hate that he couldn't justify being a reason people might go there.
People were going to Twitter to (as part of their various reasons for going there) to read what I was posting. Based on my ethics I could not morally continue to post, bringing people there, given what else they would be exposed to while there.
I don't think theirs is a good faith argument, exactly. Your decision's rooted in an objection to Meta's policy change that will bring harm to human beings. Deciding that it's okay to dehumanize a group of people isn't just politics or an election result you didn't like. My god.
This person has the privilege and the cojones to assert that inhumanity's a mere trifle that shouldn't get in the way of their enjoyment of your (gorgeous and divine) bird photos. They don't deserve you, Carl.
I think we need to carefully consider whether deleting every platform is the right thing to do, but depends how one uses it. I think it has become somewhat important that people have increased access to people they actually know or have known in real life. But each have to decide for themselves.
Would your account be blocked on that other platform if you wrote to look for future updates on Bluesky?
Personally I would do that and keep account open for say 3-6months before shutting it down.
That is also a statement.
I hope you find peace in your choise. Whatever it may be.
I think that makes it either not a good faith argument or a deeply misguided one, fwiw. They think you’re throwing a tantrum; you were pretty clear about your reasons.
If Meta were the only platform,
or if you shared content on EVERY platform (Discord, LinkedIn, Tumblr, etc) perhaps this has merit.
You get to choose where you share your knowledge, just as a professor at a university ultimately chooses where she is tenured. Meta is not a peer reviewed journal.
Do you have a Bluesky channel that's just birds? If so maybe keep the old Instagram album as a lure and then point people to Bluesky for the new stuff - entice them over here
Meta is not forever - It can be replaced by something the people actually want. Just like X. We cannot continue to support these hateful people by using their platforms. Lets build something better and put them out of business.
On this: it's worth teaching/reminding others what the internet was like BEFORE full-on social media. If you wanted to see some content, you had to take on the minor inconvenience of going to their page directly.
We outsourced clicking favourite buttons to scrolling through algorithms and it sucks.
Bring back RSS feeds! I still use Reeder daily so I can have updates served to me. However. there is a community aspect to having stuff centralized on one platform that is/can be worthwhile that can’t be replicated by a zillion individual websites.
So many people think Meta sites ARE the internet. We need to get people tools like Myspace or Geocities again so they can build their own web presence.
You're not removing them from existence, you're moving your collection from one display stand to another. If people don't like that, that's their choice. You are under no obligation to help make a business money by displaying your wares there.
For me:
I locked my Twitter account and haven't been back; but I figured there is some small chance it might get sold to someone who is not a monster, and then I could unlock it.
Until then he's paying for storage and I intend to log in once every six months to keep it alive.
IG is a for-profit platform. Your level of recognition will follow you to here. Your wholesome educational content ultimately keeps people engaged on IG, which is what makes them money. And if they’re operating in a way that’s unethical to you, leaving is appropriate!
Tell them there's politics that's just about numbers and procedures, then there's politics that hurt people or help people. This is about Meta / Facebook deciding to hurt people, and you won't let that be reduced to just numbers.
And it's not removed, just moved. Don't be lazy, look elsewhere too
The argument may be in "good faith" but is predicated on a false belief that considers the moral and ethical issues mere "politics," a position that in of itself represents the degradation of principles to be protested and fought.
You're leaving (among other reasons I'm sure) in protest. The way protest works is by inconveniencing people - sometimes people you like and regret having to inconvenience. Hopefully this person and others are encouraged by your example and by the inconvenience to follow you elsewhere.
I don't see how staying is any form of protest. And even if it's in good faith, they don't seem to understand you are responding directly to policy changes on a platform, not amorphous post-election politics.
It's not really a good faith argument, is it? They claim that you leaving is about the election, when you've stated it's about the new policies of the platform. They're ignoring your words in favor of their feeling that they're entitled to have your content without the inconvenience of your beliefs.
It’s sooooo frustrating that people equate one or two platforms as being the entirety of the internet.
Own your own website, post them there. Never have to worry about things like this again. That was the original (and lasting) promise of the World Wide Web.
"Ultimately any content on the platform helps drive revenue to bad actors that are actively harming humanity. While the education on different species of bird is valuable, it doesn't outweigh the harm these policies cause to people."
"...to people and the natural world."
If their motivation is education around species, then worth highlighting that the wider natural world is not a priority for those calling the shots.
Instagram is not the entirety of the internet. What a weird argument that you’re depriving humanity of your content simply by not sharing it via some shitty billionaire’s website.
You could put your photos elsewhere, and then you’re not depriving anyone of anything?
This is why I feel it's not a good faith question.
"I cannot be arsed to change, so you should stay, uh, um, as a protest! You can use this platform to send messages of love and attract abuse from a population that will only become more hidebound and intolerant over time, because I can't internet."
Just wanted to upvote this with my own comment. This person could absolutely find your work (wherever you choose to share it). It's not your job/responsibility to make it super-duper convenient for them by posting where they wish you to.
You have some great bird photos! I always had Flickr and never used instagram.. thought about it but now glad I didn’t. Deleted my account too. Now trying figure out all my photos on Facebook and likely deleting that too. It sucks but necessary on principle.
Sounds good!! I am still figuring out Bluesky. I had a Twitter acct but never used it and deleted when the muscat bought it. I have lots of photos on FB and need to download them. Still use my old school Flickr acct for my bird photos. 🦅🦆🦉🐦⬛
I don't get it. This sounds like an attempt by Meta to be more like X. But X is going down hill. Seems stupid even from a purely capitalist perspective.
Does it matter if you end up doing it until it’s only your own website where people will go? There is no non profit social media. Do you know the beliefs of Bluesky? Is it not profit? For how long? Then what?
I haven't used that platform in a long time. I'm convinced it's mostly bots driving the engagement anyway. Same with YouTube. Though it's a place with some great content, every live stream, the chat is always nothing but drivel. I hope BlueSky can always maintain what it has built.
I did the same last night. Sucks but as the son of a gay man married to a woman with a lesbian mom, having grown up with plenty of gay and some trans friends, I don’t need to be part of this anymore.
Thank you. My account was mostly defunct and I hadn't touched it in years, so it was hardly a cost to me to delete... but I just did and it still was hard. So I recognise what that took for you, with an active and thriving account sharing amazing photos with a big audience.
Andy, I appreciate the kind words, and also it was not something I had to pause and think about. It’s so obvious what the right thing to do is and there is no reason to lve our lives any other way.
(By the way, one of my most popular pictures there was taken on your deck)
This is so sad. I used to follow some nature photographers, some (semi-)pro adventurers (polar, mostly) and some craftspeople on instagram (mainly). I basically have not been there for years by now, for reasons. Time to delete, I think.
I all but gave up 2ish years ago; since there are only ads for garbage versions of things my arts friends make instead of seeing people I follow. I always enjoyed your posts on tw*tter. There isn’t enough crow content here yet.. I need to start drawing crows again.
@carlbergstrom.com: just a question: is Bsky better or is it just at the moment better? I feel like it still has to go through "maturity" and it's not clear how it may evolve. For ex. regarding revenue model.
We need rules for the socials' algorithm. Laws.
I’m doing the same—taking down FB, Insta, and Threads over the next few weeks. I need a little time to disentangle business & make sure my friends and family know how to find me. Today I’ll be posting something similar and will allow a few days for my note to be seen. Thank you for the inspiration.
Yeah it’s nonsense. I have been on a half dozen different platforms over the last couple decades. Nothing lasts forever and no corporation needs defending.
Never been on instagram, and was never really active on Twitter. It’s probably a bit like losing a treasured photo album - all the memories suddenly less accessible, plus losing some contacts. But I don’t think Musk/Zuck can change - I think only now they fully show their true self.
Ours look like this. Unfortunately the regularly resident nesting couple (& descendants?) in our cypress often drive off or kill smaller passerines who would also like to nest in the neighborhood 😔
It’s a huge wrench, I’ve been posting my wee pictures on there for decades as they gradually ruined it. I’m furious they are wrecking everything. Why can’t we have connection and delight? Plus most of our local LGBT groups use it for connection and events etc. It’s a silencing and isolation tactic.
Hats off! This is logically consistent. Congratulations. "Es gibt kein richtiges Leben im falschen" I'd say to people who ask you to stay. Let's all go to BlueSky or even better to the Fediverse. Is Pixelfed an option?
don;t forget what's app etc. meta has been found guilty for it's part in the myanmar's genecide (and god knows what other genecides). let alone all this recent bollocks.
Strong move. I left Threads but not yet Instagram. I really love all the light hearted funny posts, pro-publica learning videos, helpful kind hearted psychology, and cat jokes. It is already not that. Bluesky is not the same. I’m so tired of watching things I love get destroyed by broken men.
I'm trying to figure this out, too. I follow a lot of uplifting posts on IG that focus on art, gardening, and nature (and cats). I'm really going to miss that, and not sure where else I can find that same curated visual content, especially because I prefer photos to videos.
Recently, I have been discussing roofing with my son who is having problems with his house. I’ve not searched Internet, asked Siri a question, or similar - just talked to my kid on the phone…
Yesterday, all of my Instagram’s ads shifted to roofing companies .
A new app is almost ready to be released to replace Instagram. https://pixelfed.social It works on the web and through one third party app but they are almost done beta testing the app for the android/iOS stores.
👏 I wish more people would take the stand like this and put your money where your mouth is. Think EM is a menace? Get off twitter. Think MZ is a threat? Get off Threads and Insta. You will be fine. It's a minor inconvenience at first. But you're not gonna die.
There's an initiative for as many people as possible to leave Twitter on the strategically important date of January the 20th. It's called the #XOdus — I plan to leave on that day.
You can prepare and be effective right now in checking infrequently between now and then, deleting old interactions, downloading if you like, checking the handles of those with whom you want to keep interacting, and not adding any new material. 🖖
Comments
My heart goes out to you.
But if I were to, I guess I'd try to get across the idea that continuing to use it because the content is popular as a protest is similar to donating to the salvation army in protest of their LGBT stance
The respect and reputation they themselves brought up is also based on your principles, which they are asking you to compromise for the sake of their convenience.
Let them know they are welcome to test the waters over here.
When has "stay and protest" worked on Meta's platforms or X? Staying gives them ad revenue...
Here's Cord Jefferson's thoughts
https://bsky.app/profile/lauraolin.bsky.social/post/3lfjel3pgms2z
Staying implies "I am ok with this bigotry" EVEN THOUGH it means people won't be able to "learn from you" or "be in community with you" or whatever else on Instagram.
Staying because people want to learn despite the bigots is saying to the LGBTQ2S+ community that THEY don't matter and their ability to participate is irrelevant.
There are alternatives. Multiple photo sharing websites exist.
Meta's hostility towards minorities is ongoing. Staying and teaching the people who remain and insisting that's some kind of protest is a misunderstanding, because the people who are harmed are gone.
And we all (if we bother to think) can remember Facebook's role in things like the Cambridge Analytica scandal and the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar.
Exploitation of the environment to drive engagement so users line up against each other across divisive issues and throw digital rocks is a pattern that repeats across a range of fault lines in society.
Facilitating/amplifying this for profit feels worse.
I think Zuckerberg has always told us who he is, he's just more comfortable being open about it now. (ie it's hostility)
I don't see how greed motivates you to cut out a very thriving (and engagement-driving) portion of your userbase.
But, more and more, I think about the expression “meeting them where they are” in concert with the realization that we don’t NEED any of these places … That expression is about a physical and mental space.
Rogers really needs a counter point for DoI. Revolution through Irritation, or something similar. The model would even look familiar.
If it were me*, the question becomes “am I reaching them?” is that my goal? How? Is that the point?
After a time, I finally realized, people stayed on Twitter for reasons. Why will Meta be any different? Not today, but eventually, the same will ring true.
Indicating that people can find you, and your beautiful photographs, on Bluesky 🦋 at @carlbergstrom.com
That deflates all the arguments in that person’s comment.
Also, as an educator, choosing where you interact is also informative to those who value your work.
1/2
Unfortunately, the OP's response to me and another commenter suggests that you were also right about not-quite-as-good-faith-as-I-thought.
Hopefully Bluesky is kinder to ya.
It's obviously your decision but i strongly suggest to run
Nobody is entitled to content and social media has made a lot of people forget that.
I would just say no - you don’t owe anyone anything. If they’re curious enough, they should be able to find your work with a simple search.
(Also, I doubt this is good faith)
Unless they pay me a salary I do not have to provide anything to anyone. Ok, family and dependents, but we all understand this distinction, and I have been too long on social media & Usenet, as seen by me feeling the need to point that out specifically.
The argument also uses the iffy "don't make it political" line. Most things are political...
Besides, "stay" isn't a protest, it's the status quo."
There is no stay in protest, since Meta makes money off of your presence.
The choices are pretty much stay (& provide Meta with content) or leave (& deny Meta your content).
Here in the US, TikTok probably isn’t going to be it….
It’s always that phrase that gets me. What’s more important than how we treat each other through who we elect to lead us?
This idea that elections should be “suffered through” as opposed to being one of the most important things we do just leaves me gobsmacked.
We have so much. But we know nothing.
maybe pointing out the bloodbath and authoritarian regimes it helped might make your point across
As others have said, it's not the only website on the internet.
Nevermind
Personally I would do that and keep account open for say 3-6months before shutting it down.
That is also a statement.
I hope you find peace in your choise. Whatever it may be.
The only action that sends a message is leaving
or if you shared content on EVERY platform (Discord, LinkedIn, Tumblr, etc) perhaps this has merit.
You get to choose where you share your knowledge, just as a professor at a university ultimately chooses where she is tenured. Meta is not a peer reviewed journal.
It's important to frame this as a moral decision, rather than a political one. Moreover, I fall in line with the "people not platforms" model.
Thus, I'd close by listing the places they can follow or connect with you elsewhere.
We outsourced clicking favourite buttons to scrolling through algorithms and it sucks.
You're not removing them from existence, you're moving your collection from one display stand to another. If people don't like that, that's their choice. You are under no obligation to help make a business money by displaying your wares there.
I want to stress it is not your obligation to fix this problem, but I would consider re-hosting elsewhere? Particular if there is legit science value.
I locked my Twitter account and haven't been back; but I figured there is some small chance it might get sold to someone who is not a monster, and then I could unlock it.
Until then he's paying for storage and I intend to log in once every six months to keep it alive.
IG is a for-profit platform. Your level of recognition will follow you to here. Your wholesome educational content ultimately keeps people engaged on IG, which is what makes them money. And if they’re operating in a way that’s unethical to you, leaving is appropriate!
And it's not removed, just moved. Don't be lazy, look elsewhere too
Own your own website, post them there. Never have to worry about things like this again. That was the original (and lasting) promise of the World Wide Web.
If their motivation is education around species, then worth highlighting that the wider natural world is not a priority for those calling the shots.
You could put your photos elsewhere, and then you’re not depriving anyone of anything?
(flickr is still around, fwiw.)
"I cannot be arsed to change, so you should stay, uh, um, as a protest! You can use this platform to send messages of love and attract abuse from a population that will only become more hidebound and intolerant over time, because I can't internet."
(By the way, one of my most popular pictures there was taken on your deck)
You're a good person, you know.
As a bird lover (especially crows!), so sad it has come to this, but we need to fight the fascists, don't we?
https://bsky.app/profile/techcrunch.com/post/3lfsbev5t3i2m
https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/01/15/205226/bluesky-is-getting-its-own-photo-sharing-app-flashes
We need rules for the socials' algorithm. Laws.
Will this Meta reversal revive Flickr?
On the other hand, they just went from bad to completely reprehensible.
Lots of respect to you for doing the right thing. I know breakups are hard.
Yesterday, all of my Instagram’s ads shifted to roofing companies .
It’s an evil place built to us.