Writing For Love, Not Algorithms

Are we losing our souls to technology?

Today is a slow day, as we assimilate the impact of my son’s newly broken arm into the planning for the remainder of the school holidays, and I navigate the latest annoying lurgy to befall me (just me, no other member of my family, which despite being an obvious relief is also frustrating given I’m the one who is obsessed with avoiding bugs at all costs).

As I lie in bed, skimming my to do list and trying to pick only the most urgent tasks to focus on, so that I might glean the tiniest bit of benefit from being horizontal for once, there is one issue I keep coming back to - algorithms.

I struggle to batch content for my social channels, which means that most of my posts are created, if not totally off the cuff, with little advance planning.

It’s a frustrating way to work, particularly as a busy mother, because one child-related issue can throw you off completely and result in zero content being produced for days.

I’ve tried to get ChatGPT to help with content creation and save me time, and whilst it can be useful for brainstorming and organising, it hasn’t evolved sufficiently to convince me it’s a useful substitute for original human content creation (both a frustration and a relief).

So where does that leave me?

Creating content off the cuff, as and when the mood takes me - and time allows.

Which is particularly challenging where algorithms are concerned.

Lately I’ve seen my reach on all channels - and particularly Linkedin - plummet. I know I’m not alone in this.

Presumably the algorithms have changed to promote different content, and I and the majority of my peers are yet to see the memo about why this is.

This morning, for example, I had prepared what I thought to be a pretty decent carousel post about my personal experience of maternal guilt this week after my son broke his arm.

On paper it ticked all the boxes - personal story hook, value content etc.

The post did okay on Instagram, but on Linkedin it garnered 13 impressions. THIRTEEN???

I get it. It’s the summer holidays, people are away, my posting has been erratic lately, I haven’t been as active engaging with others’ content.

But still.

When a post performs poorly, our first thought is usually that there’s something wrong with the content of the post.

Here’s where I have an issue.

I liked the content of that post. Very much. I felt it was a well-rounded piece that provided value, insight and solidarity for other mothers experiencing similar issues.

I mean, it wasn’t groundbreaking or anything. But it looked pretty, it had value. It was authentically me.

That’s the type of content I want to put out.

Yet the algorithm gods say it’s worthless.

Well here’s my reframe, algorithm gods:

You may only have deemed my post worthy to show to thirteen people, but if it helps just one of those thirteen, it will have succeeded, whatever your metrics of success may be.

I won’t bow to the Metas of this world, to the coding that says posts by influencers advertising pointless products that won’t make us look younger or feel better and will only sink us further into our overdrafts are more important than posts like mine, which seek to help mothers feel better about themselves in a toxic society that actively tries to do the opposite.

I guess that’s why I’m here on Substack, to relieve my frustration about algorithms and society’s indoctrination into capitalist bullsh*t, and to show up, authentically, writing about anything I want to, to anyone who feels compelled to read it.

Does anyone else feel the same?