Why Is My Feed So Straight?

Short Essay

I joined Substack about two months ago. Like many people, I have spent time since I joined, trying to make sense of what the algorithm shows me on my feed.

I’ve discovered that the system rewards frequent posting of Notes and favors some topics over others. I have become adept at spotting AI generated writing. And, I have observed something else as well. My feed seems to be incredibly straight.

Given that my primary categories of interest are fiction and literature, the absence of queerness on my feed stands out. I can’t picture literature without queer writers.

It was noteworthy that during June, which was Pride month, I didn’t see the word “queer” on my feed. I might have expected to see a few Notes about influential queer writers, present or past. Somebody on the Substack platform might have written about Oscar Wilde, Willa Cather, or James Baldwin (some of my favorites), but I didn’t see it.

By contrast, the algorithm regularly shows me Notes about topics related to heterosexual relationships, which seem to be strongly featured on my feed.

During the past two months, I have encountered a few queer writers indirectly, through their posts about neurodivergence. The algorithm does seem to recognize my interest in brain-based topics.

It brings me to the reason for this post.

The algorithm chooses to show me Notes about a restricted set of straight mainstream topics. As a result, I am less likely to come across the work of queer writers. Looking at it the other way, it makes me wonder how much exposure the algorithm gives to non-mainstream writers overall, as it chooses what different people see.

UPDATE: I saw the first Note on my feed directly written by a queer person 5 hours after posting this. So far, the algorithm has shown me just that one writer, no others.

Until next time.