(Photo by jigsawstocker)
Social media platform Parler is becoming one of the fastest-growing alternatives to Facebook and Twitter. In July, after a Twitter exit campaign - dubbed #twexit - it reported 2.8 million registered accounts. After the November 2020 Presidential Election, the network more than doubled its user base.
According to Parler CEO John Matze, Parler servers saw about 2 million logons Saturday, November 7th - the same day its app reach #1 in the Free Apps category. And by Monday, November 9th, it reached the 8 million account milestone. The network is now home to more than 12 million Parler citizens.
While the young social channel is attracting plenty of far-rights and other groups deemed "questionable," it's also home to people who are merely tired of the filtering of content that would typically fall under the First Amendment and being force-fed biased information. Contrary to popular belief, Parler was not founded as a conservative space. Matze has long desired for liberals to join the conversation. At one point, he offered a $20,000 bounty to attract a liberal pundit to the platform.
What makes Parler attractive to many is its simplicity. It is a free-speech social media network that doesn't mine people's data. Everything you see in your feed is based on real-time posting and commenting. There's no algorithm or psychology used to determine which content is most apt to keep you online.
Compared to Twitter and Facebook
Parler is often compared to two of the largest social media networks, Twitter and Facebook. However, it lacks many features users have come to love. Parler doesn't feature polls, business pages, or third-party tie-ins like games and marketing tools. There's also no listening or posting APIs for third-party developers, so posting content has to happen directly within the app or web browser.
But the alternative network is working on a suite of new features, including Dens. Due to launch in January 2021, Dens are the competitive response to Facebook Groups, which account for the majority of that platform's daily users. According to The Washington Post, at least two-thirds of Facebook's 2.74 billion global users participate in Groups, and Groups are a key reason even those who hate Facebook won't leave.
In its current state, Parler is more like early Twitter than any stage of Facebook. It boasts a simplified design and relies on hashtags to communicate with the masses.
Where Parler trumps the aforementioned networks is its moderation tools and NSFW filter. Each user has control over who can comment on their parleys (posts) and what type of comments can appear. Its user-initiated Sensitive Content filter leaves parleyers responsible for warning others about nudity or gruesomeness.
A growing platform with dedicated early adopters
Parler is still in its infancy. Growing pains are being felt both behind-the-scenes and by the user base. In November, Matze reported Parler had to quadruple its tech team to keep things running. More recently, a success message appeared to ensure parleyers their content was successfully queued to post live. This was to thwart repetitive submissions due to processing delays.
The network relies on community jurors to remove appropriately reported content, including unfiltered pornography, spam, and illegal activities, rather than relying on artificial intelligence to inadvertently punish those following the rules. Facebook's continued use of artificial intelligence (AI) has growing concerns. In November, Fortune reported that Facebook's AI was mistakenly banning some small business' ads. Automated content moderation has been known to delete non-violating content and review or ban user accounts unwarranted. Most recently, a prominent member of a local LGBTQ community was auto-flagged as being homophobic.
Taking on social media giants, aka tech tyrants
Matze is headstrong about taking on the largest social media networks, who are often referred to as tech tyrants. But Parler is also beating out fellow free speech network MeWe with respect to new signups. On November 10th, MeWe moved up to the second-place slot for free apps. Just two days later, it had dropped to #8.
By mid-November, Parler had dropped to #67 in App Store, while Twitter dropped down to #22. Still, making and staying in the top 100 free apps list is a coveted position for any application.
Boycotting psychology as a manipulation tactic
Parler denounces using psychology to manipulate users' actions. This practice is widespread on big networks because it benefits companies in many ways, including financially. TikTok's "For You Page" is its most valuable asset. It's designed to keep you scrolling and watching until, eventually, telling you it's time to take a break. Twitter promotes extensive sessions via trending hashtags and sponsored content. Facebook's algorithm successfully keeps people online, even to get sucked into heated debates they never intended to jump in on.
While getting caught in a time trap is possible on Parler, it's based entirely on the members. No back-end magician is producing tailored feeds; there's no computer-enhanced psychology begging one to stay online.
Netflix's documentary The Social Dilemma has prompted many people to think about how much control social media has over their lives. Yale professor Edward Tufte's comment about the hold networks have on people did not go unnoticed.
"There are only two industries that call their customers' users': illegal drugs and software."
It was enough to make Parler revisit how it labels its users. In October, Matze announced the company would start calling those using the platform 'people' or 'citizens.' The term 'parleyers' has also been adopted.
"I hate the term 'users' now," Matze told Fox News.
Conspiracy theories and all
For many, two of the least attractive social media aspects go hand-in-hand: conspiracy theories and gullibility. As a general rule, Parler bans neither. Hence, parleyers often find themselves needing to research posted content. But many agree they'd rather research to determine a parley's validity than have posts and comments fact-checked against potentially unreliable sources.
On December 17th, Instagram censored a post linking President-Elect Biden to mass incarceration due to his 1994 crime bill that incentivized states to make inmates serve the majority of their sentences. Some argue the law, signed by President Clinton, resulted in the mass incarceration of Blacks. While a matter of debate, Facebook relies on fact-checking partners - predominantly the media - to call the shots when flagging content as false.
Facebook spokeswoman Stephanie Otway told The New York Post that USA Today's assessment of the claim triggered the Instagram post's censorship.
"People can appeal a rating by contacting a fact-checking partner directly. Fact-checking partners are ultimately responsible for deciding whether to update a rating, which will lift enforcement on the content," she said.
Under intense scrutiny
Parler often falls under the magnifying glass because of its largely conservative audience. This regularly results in headlines painting the network as bad, despite controversial issues being common across all social networks. On Facebook, heated debates about who won the Presidential election resulted in thousands of conservative pages, groups, and accounts being shut down.
According to the New York Times, lawmakers from both major parties seem to agree that networks enforce content policies inconsistently. And network executives have acknowledged the need for reform.
Something rarely discussed is Parler's members who don't talk politics at all. The platform hosts a growing number of artists, musicians, hobbyists, and people who want to talk about everyday life. Though they also agree that the real issue has been others trying to take control of one's voice.
A Pew Research Center poll revealed that most Americans think social media sites censor people based on political viewpoints. 67% say they have no or little confidence in social media networks deciding what content is inaccurate.
Social media users who value free speech want to speak their minds. They don't want to be fact-checked by the media or be stifled unless they violate the First Amendment or a network's fairly-enforced policies. Yet large networks like Facebook don't accurately explain what those policies actually cover.