>

Can you link to any of those communities you mention, or are you talking historically (nearly 10 years ago)? 
All of the worst offenders of what you say have been long gone from Reddit as far as I'm aware
What similarly sized social media is better than Reddit today in terms of toxicity? You say it's more toxic than most, name names of what you think is less toxic?
/u/humvee911 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards >

Reddit you have to actively sub to a group, on other social media platforms they push "shorts" video and spam with lots of ads and "you might know" people. The ads on Reddit blend in which makes it nicer when scrolling through everything. >

I feel like that's been changing though. Recently I've got a lot of "subs you might be interested in" appearing in my feed. >

Occasionally that happens and I have been randomly selected to be added to some shitty sub with 27 people. But not to the extent that other platforms do it. Also I enjoy the anonymously. >

Who says that Reddit is less toxic than other social media? If you're hearing that from Redditors, it sounds like a biased source. >

People do, typically appealing to the more niche subs that can indeed have nice communities. But every default sub is still a vat of toxic brainlet sludge. >


But every default sub is still a vat of toxic brainlet sludge.

And the inverse: other platforms have niche groups with less toxicity too. >

I get sucked in pretty easily no matter which social media I’m on. What I like about Reddit is I feel like I have a bit more control over where I go and what I look at. There’s pretty much a subreddit for any interest or mood. ….. Not that it matters when you get stuck following links all night instead. 😅
Jokes aside, yeah, there’s toxicity, but I’ve also run into so many truly nice people. >

The ability to highly tailor the content you experience on Reddit is both a blessing and a curse. A blessing for the obvious reason, more stuff you like funneled your way with less bullshit. But that leads to a positive feedback loop, or "echo chamber". You are being fed what you want to hear and already believe. That's not conducive to healthy growth. Opinions or perspectives that challenge yours aren't inherently negative, and can often help change or refine your original view. >

True. I actively seek multiple points of view, so this was certainly a negative I wasn’t thinking about in the moment I posted. I was mostly thinking generals. You can find drama if you want, or if you aimlessly wander, but you can stick to hobbies or heartwarming, or whatever itch the scary subs scratch. I mostly avoid politics online because it’s hard to get more than a snapshot of what people really believe, (at least, I’m not good at accurately and concisely expressing myself) but I’ve found several political discussions where everyone involved is actively trying to have constructive conversation. It mostly depends on where you go. >

It depends on what groups you choose to view. I don’t see toxicity in made me smile, animals being derps, humans being bros, nba, I took a picture of, vagabond, what is this thing, camping, food porn, dad jokes etc..
You can make your own bed with what you choose to view. If you think what you’re seeing is toxic and continue to follow that group and complain, that’s not Reddit, fault. Topics can be entertaining, informative, engaging, funny….I don’t agree with your premise at all. >

I feel like this is it for most social media sites.
I'm on twitter. I follow almost primarily artists, and a few people I know personally.
And if anyone starts spewing hot takes, I unfollow and/or block them because I don't use twitter to have discussions or talk about theories - I use it to look at pictures, and occasionally comment on my day/my friend's tweets.
Just curate your own experience. If they do not spark joy, just fucking block them or something. Life's too short. >

The problem is that Twitter will push popular tweets at you that are vaguely connected to your interests to get engagements, and usually from people counter to what you actually want in order to get you angry. If you like dogs, you will get posts from #dogsrunoverlol >

Only if you use 'For You' instead of 'Following'.
Obviously, Twitter wants to push things it'll think will create engagement, but you can still ignore it. >


Most subreddit posts are full of concealed rants and toxicity.

That's the difference: on other social media platforms (Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, etc.), it's not concealed. The toxicity is open and notorious. The fact that Reddit conceals toxicity through downvoting and subreddit sorting makes it somewhat less toxic. >

You have brought up a good point with the visible downvotes. Δ
However, that doesn't necessarily mean that there does not exist a "downvote" button on other social media platforms. There are, they just don't make it visible, I think the reasoning is so that they put less stress on the creators?
Also, by concealed toxicity, I was also talking about the top posts being concealed toxicity. >

It's not so much that downvote buttons don't exist on other social media (although sometimes they do not), it's that these buttons don't effectively hide content on other social media. Pressing the "dislike" button on YouTube doesn't stop people from viewing the video or from being recommended the video. >

I'm pretty sure a dislike will affect the viewership of the content, even if it's not shown. >

It affects the videos you see and get recommended. >

It also affects who else gets shown the video. It still doesn't reduce the amount of people who will be shown the video, of course. But the recommendations algorithm also uses "people like you also like" type inferences, so if you dislike a video, people who seem to have a similar taste to you will be less likely to see it, while people who seem to have the opposite taste will be more likely to see it. >

The best place to see the downvote bots is probably 
r/conspiracy just look at its active users and then the amount of upvotes the posts gets it's extremely obvious it happens on every sub.
Or go post any criticism of the left on r/politics it's pretty insane how authoritarian this place is. >

much of reddit is very authoritarian far left >


Almost every post there seems to be influenced by some sort of pessimism geared to rile people up that is very similar to the 24 hour news cycle that society apparently hates.

Each sub is also far more moderated than any social media platform, making it alright to be outraged over certain controversies and not outraged with others. This closes the gap on anonymity. >

As a queer person I can assure you Twitter is much, much worse from my perspective. I'm sure there are worse parts of Reddit, but it doesn't regularly put messages from people who think I should not be allowed human rights in front of me. Some going so far as to suggest concentration camps. Twitter is a fun place... >

“Black people are the reason your life is so hard” >

I mean yeah, every social media platform is problematic and toxic sprinkled in with a few good pieces. Human life is problematic and toxic sprinkled in with a few exceptions. It's a perfect pairing. 
Life is shit wall to wall for many, if there's something you would prefer to do, you should do that. >

All social constructs involve toxicity. That would include all social media platform and real life interactions too. Humans imagining things and imposing their imaginations on each other and on themselves.
When I want to exist without toxicity, I go for a walk in the forest. >

Agree 💯! >

I agree >

Sounds like you’re in the wrong subs then >

is this sub getting the same post quality as unpopular opinion? >

There are people on YouTube advocating for violence and hate, do you still use YouTube? This is a charged question or at the least a rigged one because you are asking for your opinion to be changed on a matter entirely based on what subs you frequent and the users found within. >

Reddit is 50% propaganda, 49% porn and onlyfans ads, and 1% everything else. The site died when Ellen Pao took over a few years back and it’s been a shit show ever since. >

The difference is that you have the power to unsubscribe from entire subreddits and just not see any of that content. This is unlike YouTube, Twitter, or Facebook, which pushes you content from individuals proportional to how many subscribers they have and related to topics they think you like. You can block one youtuber, but you'll get recommendations from another on the same topics. This means that it's much easier to get radicalized on those platforms because there's no clear "I don't want this anymore" button.
Reddit will regularly ban entire subs for violating their content policies, and studies show that the toxicity does not "spread" to other subs. Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, etc don't have this option. They're playing whack a mole with individual accounts, so toxicity is way more rampant. >

Is reddit less toxic than every other social media platform? No, of course not ... there's got to be a less toxic social media platform out there, somewhere.
But is reddit less toxic than many social media platforms? Certainly. Here's why:

Reddit gives you visibility into which echo chambers you are joining. When you go to r/Conservative, you know you're going to a subreddit for American conservatives; and so on for the various more or less toxic communities on the site. Visible, self-proclaimed bias is less insidious.
Reddit is moderated. Everybody hates reddit mods, but compared to a platform like Twitter, you're far more likely to see behavioral rules enforced (even though those rules will be defined by the community they're in -- see point #1).
Downvotes are really important. Platforms without a downvote functionality (or where the downvote has no impact on the sorting algorithm, a la "dislikes") create a completely different set of incentives, and you can see the impact on how people behave on the platform:
If you have ... neither upvote nor downvote (bulletin board / forum norm), then the posts with the most recent responses are the most visible. So the things that'll get the most attention are the things that are most provocative, whether people like them or hate them. That makes trolling very rewarding, and the end result is ... 4chan.
If you have ... an upvote and no downvote, then the posts with the most "likes" are the most visible. That means the posts that'll get the most attention are the ones that either:
Everyone likes a bit (puppies! kittens!)
Some people like an awful lot, even if most people hate them (racism! bigotry! boomer memes!)
This makes extreme opinions and hot takes extremely rewarding, and the end result is ... twitter


If you have ... an upvote and a downvote button, then the posts with the most net "likes" are the most visible. So the things that'll get the most attention are the things that either:
Everyone likes a bit (puppies! kittens!) and nobody really dislikes
Most people like a lot, and some people dislike a lot (poems for your sprog! pun chains! the ole reddit switcheroooo!)
This makes generally well-liked and supported opinions and reasoned takes more rewarding, extreme opinions less rewarding, and the result is ... reddit.



So reddit ends up having plenty of toxic opinions -- but they're either downvoted to oblivion (and therefore, you're much less likely to see them), or they're upvoted wildly ... in a small walled-off community of like-minded toxic people, which you don't have to go to if you don't want to, and therefore can easily avoid. >

Wrong. It's actually more toxic.
And probably racist too. And they are inconsistent with their ban policy >

Just tell people that you are Russian or chinese. And they just explode. 
In the good ol' days when you want to troll a community, you jave to engineer a perfectly stupid comment thay pisses everyone off, now all you need to say is, "hello, I'm Russian." >

I mean... You can probably guess why people might have a negative view of Russian posters right now, given the situation. >

I actually can't, can you elaborate? >

There has been an influx of pro russian bots and apologists spreading pro russia propaganda. >

Sure, and that should be called out when it happens, but the topic at hand is:  

Just tell people that you are Russian or chinese. And they just explode.

So we're just talking about redditors that live in Russia. >

Right. But as to my point: You can see why people might have a negative view. Because the amount of concern trolling and propaganda spewed by apologists is noticeable. 
On the other hand if someone were to write "I am in Russia and don't support the war or Putin" then I would think they would get quite a different reaction. >

I'm not really sure why, but Redditors just seem to have less "ego." By that I mean there is more personal identity associated with other social media. Besides people using their real names on Facebook, on every other platform people are distinctively recognized.
Like I know who Mr. Beast is, even though I've never watched one of his videos.
Is there a bunch of popular and well known to the general population Redditors? I can't think of any.
I barely recognize the top contributors to this sub, let alone reddit as a whole. >

It also helps that you don't even need to "verify" your existence with a mobile phone or email to create a Reddit account. You just type a nick and a password (twice) and you're in. >

The people that say Reddit is less toxic are the same people who don’t leave their subreddits >

The neck beards and right wing trolls are making Reddit intolerable. >

Yeah, like that case when Reddit "solved" a case and blamed someone innocent. There's also tons of illegal and violent shit on here >

I mean, TikTok actively has a girl trying to accuse a victim of a school shooting of perpetrating the shooting... And there's tons of people that use it to sell drugs, scam, and do illicit acts to or with minors.
At best, Reddit is good at hiding it's nasty...let's not forget that r/jailbait was a thing and it was a trending sub until it's eventual purge/quarantining. >

I'm with you on looking at the dangers of social media as a whole.  That said, at least on Reddit you have to read a few comments to get into the toxicity.  TikTok is like the crack of toxicity. You watch a Bill Maher or Joe Rogan video and within 15 minutes you're face to face with some nut job dry humping his AK and calling for civil war. >

To start, yes, reddit is toxic. However, unlike most other social media, there is less opportunity for it to be an echo chamber unless you specifically aim to only subscribe to subreddits that fit your worldview perfectly. If you have somewhat of a diverse set of interests and hobbies, you are probably going to see a diverse set of perspectives and opinions.
Now, it could absolutely be better, but at least from my experience, it's better than the rest. Then again, I just joined the 15 year club, so I'm probably biased. >

I would say the exact opposite is true, reddit's upvote/downvote visibility system is more conducive to echo chambers than any other social media system I've ever seen >

Interesting. Will give that a read, thanks >

Reddit has had groups specifically for child porn, violent political groups, and cyber bullying. It's also mostly anonymous, which means people feel free to say terrible things without real-life consequences, and does not have a consistent site-wide moderating strategy, which means people can say terrible things without online consequences most of the time as well. Finally, Reddit is owned by media behemoth Condé Nast, which has no agenda other than to squeeze every drop of profit out of the site.
Reddit is MORE toxic than most other social media platforms, and it's not even close in some cases.