Does the Algorithm Undermine Inclusion? Why Social Media Rewards Outrage Over Real Change

I focus my LinkedIn posts on being thought-provoking and action-oriented, steering clear of ‘pet pictures’ and newsjacking. Drawing from real-life experiences in both work and personal life, I aim to spark meaningful discussions.

Impressions speak volumes:
– 389,000: Men in trainers vs. women in stilettos.
– 163,000: A politician shedding tears.
– 44,000: Exploring the concept of tradwives.
– 34,000: Shedding light on invisible women.
– 16,000: Contrasting a working mother with a 65-year-old man.

In contrast:
– 3,000: Delving into meritocracy and gender targets.
– 1,165: Encouraging speak-up cultures.
– 519: Advocating for creating space for quiet voices.
– 202: Pushing beyond tokenism in Black History Month.

Does the algorithm favor outrage, stereotypes, and simplistic symbols, burying posts about systemic change, genuine inclusion, and equity? Or are the impressions a reflection on us, the audience?

This raises the question: how and where can we have the tough conversations and share real solutions that drive change?

How does our feed influence our perspectives and shape our narratives ?