There's a story does the rounds in the UK that one of the train companies had a really bad record on punctuality and sought to do something about it. In due course, its 'performance' greatly improved - apparently because it just cancelled trains that were going to be overly late. I don't know whether it's true (UK trains are so outrageously bad, it could be true) but the story captures well the idiocy of false metrics in public/corporate life.
I’ve recently been thinking (and have written a bit) about how this is one of the biggest problems affecting businesses. Once an organisation reaches a certain size, it has a management layer that cannot afford the time to get into the weeds, so relies on dashboards and metrics to measure performance. Then the rest of the organisation must focus on those metrics to please management, and it leads to situations like this that look good in the figures but in reality erode quality.
This reminds me too of Dan Davies' The Unaccountability Machine which explores how metrics and algorithms are allowed to take over and no one is anymore accountable for decision making - and corporations become their own form of AI.
My entire career was in engineering and design at a large multinational. At some stage Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) came into fashion. These are another “game” where the scoring metrics can be detached from the objective and their intent successfully subverted - the reward being incentive bonuses etc.. Of course we already should have known this from the history of Soviet Five Year Plans, but humans learn slowly and management consultants need to sell something.
In my time in tech, I saw so much of this. Every quarter, a new metric to measure success...followed by a replacement metric when the latest metric backfired.
There are also instances where people cherry pick metrics to confirm their views or hypothesis, or fudge the data to reach a statistically significant result (replication crisis). Achievement vs striving play, the primary objective is career development and not necessarily enjoying the process. For example, in academia that would be changing your article to fit a journal’s preferences or quantitative standards which may damage your the spirit of your original intent.
Haven't read the book yet (I bought it online a couple of weeks ago from my local bookshop, but haven't gone and picked it up!), but I have been pondering something from his lecture you linked.
He talked about "moral outrage porn" - I think that was a powerful idea. On my substack feed, I kind of get the feeling I am seeing a couple of variants of this moral outrage: 1) "people don't read" and 2) "online companies are stealing our attention"
I keep reading this stuff, that I mostly agree with, but am lately questioning why am I doing so? What is the benefit to me or to anyone else to read yet another piece expressing these ideas? And why, oh why, do I read this stuff instead of the more difficult material that I have challenged myself to read?
There is always the possibility of a different insight (like I think the score might provide), but generally it now feels very random-reward like, which is a trick to keep you engaged.
Now that I've got that off my chest, I'll turn back to my 2026 goal of reading through Copleston History of Philosophy.
ps One book that provided a markedly different insight into the online world was "The Misinformation Age" by Caitlin O'Connor and James Owen Weatherall. A worthy read, though thoroughly depressing.
The U.S. News & World Report and other similar ranking systems that have reduced academic institutions to a series of metrics has, to my estimation, really accelerated the race to the bottom in higher education. Too much money is invested in things that don’t matter just to bolster ratings. Then, tuition continues to rise but educational value does not—however, they like ‘number go up.’
Secondary education is also plagued by metrics, and so many of them. Many classes are merely exam preparation because of the high stakes testing around every corner.
Added this to my "read soon" list. The way easy to measure metrics is driving decisions in the world, particularly in education, is alarming. I always appreciate your thoughtful insights, and look forward to reading this recommendation.
Excellent article as always. Is part of the problem not defining our own goals? For instance, the vagueness of "make good videos" isn't strong (what does good mean and how do you know if you made something good) and can be hijacked by the platform's goals. Likewise with making values a priority, it can still be vague, for example if the value is truth, the video is true but to what end? Making it more personal, such as "make videos that communicate an idea clearly and provoke thought", or a goal individual to each video, it is easier to see if you have achieved it. Thinking about what problem you are trying to solve, often provides clear solutions. You probably do this already as you come across as a reflective person, but it's not obvious to every creator. I also wonder if a problem with social media is that everyone feels they have to cultivate an identity and leave other parts of themselves out, like you were saying with different selves. For example, to only show the thing you are an expert at. Meanwhile, leaving out every other interest where you don't have the knowledge or skills. Even though that combination makes us interesting people. Sorry for rambling and hope some of that makes sense.
Excellent breakdown of value capture. The platform metrics thing is spot on, I've noticed with my own work how easy it is to start chasing engagment numbers instead of actual depth. The trap is that those metrics feel like objective validation whenthey're really just measuring a narrow slice of what matters. Happens in orgs too where KPIs become the goal rather than the thing they were supposed to measure.
One of my strangest character traits is that I find games HORRENDOUSLY BORING. It doesn't matter what type of game: board games, card games, video games, sports, crossword puzzles, D&D, chess, tick-tack-toe -- everything. My interest lasts about as long as it takes me to form a strategy for how to play the game, then I'm OUT. This comes with social costs. I can't go to game nights. I dread that moment at dinner parties when the box of Apples To Apples comes out -- the moment it does, I'm looking for the door. I never considered this could be a symptom of a larger cause. I think I need to read this book.
There's a story does the rounds in the UK that one of the train companies had a really bad record on punctuality and sought to do something about it. In due course, its 'performance' greatly improved - apparently because it just cancelled trains that were going to be overly late. I don't know whether it's true (UK trains are so outrageously bad, it could be true) but the story captures well the idiocy of false metrics in public/corporate life.
I’ve recently been thinking (and have written a bit) about how this is one of the biggest problems affecting businesses. Once an organisation reaches a certain size, it has a management layer that cannot afford the time to get into the weeds, so relies on dashboards and metrics to measure performance. Then the rest of the organisation must focus on those metrics to please management, and it leads to situations like this that look good in the figures but in reality erode quality.
This reminds me too of Dan Davies' The Unaccountability Machine which explores how metrics and algorithms are allowed to take over and no one is anymore accountable for decision making - and corporations become their own form of AI.
My entire career was in engineering and design at a large multinational. At some stage Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) came into fashion. These are another “game” where the scoring metrics can be detached from the objective and their intent successfully subverted - the reward being incentive bonuses etc.. Of course we already should have known this from the history of Soviet Five Year Plans, but humans learn slowly and management consultants need to sell something.
In my time in tech, I saw so much of this. Every quarter, a new metric to measure success...followed by a replacement metric when the latest metric backfired.
There are also instances where people cherry pick metrics to confirm their views or hypothesis, or fudge the data to reach a statistically significant result (replication crisis). Achievement vs striving play, the primary objective is career development and not necessarily enjoying the process. For example, in academia that would be changing your article to fit a journal’s preferences or quantitative standards which may damage your the spirit of your original intent.
Haven't read the book yet (I bought it online a couple of weeks ago from my local bookshop, but haven't gone and picked it up!), but I have been pondering something from his lecture you linked.
He talked about "moral outrage porn" - I think that was a powerful idea. On my substack feed, I kind of get the feeling I am seeing a couple of variants of this moral outrage: 1) "people don't read" and 2) "online companies are stealing our attention"
I keep reading this stuff, that I mostly agree with, but am lately questioning why am I doing so? What is the benefit to me or to anyone else to read yet another piece expressing these ideas? And why, oh why, do I read this stuff instead of the more difficult material that I have challenged myself to read?
There is always the possibility of a different insight (like I think the score might provide), but generally it now feels very random-reward like, which is a trick to keep you engaged.
Now that I've got that off my chest, I'll turn back to my 2026 goal of reading through Copleston History of Philosophy.
ps One book that provided a markedly different insight into the online world was "The Misinformation Age" by Caitlin O'Connor and James Owen Weatherall. A worthy read, though thoroughly depressing.
The U.S. News & World Report and other similar ranking systems that have reduced academic institutions to a series of metrics has, to my estimation, really accelerated the race to the bottom in higher education. Too much money is invested in things that don’t matter just to bolster ratings. Then, tuition continues to rise but educational value does not—however, they like ‘number go up.’
Secondary education is also plagued by metrics, and so many of them. Many classes are merely exam preparation because of the high stakes testing around every corner.
Added this to my "read soon" list. The way easy to measure metrics is driving decisions in the world, particularly in education, is alarming. I always appreciate your thoughtful insights, and look forward to reading this recommendation.
Excellent article as always. Is part of the problem not defining our own goals? For instance, the vagueness of "make good videos" isn't strong (what does good mean and how do you know if you made something good) and can be hijacked by the platform's goals. Likewise with making values a priority, it can still be vague, for example if the value is truth, the video is true but to what end? Making it more personal, such as "make videos that communicate an idea clearly and provoke thought", or a goal individual to each video, it is easier to see if you have achieved it. Thinking about what problem you are trying to solve, often provides clear solutions. You probably do this already as you come across as a reflective person, but it's not obvious to every creator. I also wonder if a problem with social media is that everyone feels they have to cultivate an identity and leave other parts of themselves out, like you were saying with different selves. For example, to only show the thing you are an expert at. Meanwhile, leaving out every other interest where you don't have the knowledge or skills. Even though that combination makes us interesting people. Sorry for rambling and hope some of that makes sense.
Excellent breakdown of value capture. The platform metrics thing is spot on, I've noticed with my own work how easy it is to start chasing engagment numbers instead of actual depth. The trap is that those metrics feel like objective validation whenthey're really just measuring a narrow slice of what matters. Happens in orgs too where KPIs become the goal rather than the thing they were supposed to measure.
One of my strangest character traits is that I find games HORRENDOUSLY BORING. It doesn't matter what type of game: board games, card games, video games, sports, crossword puzzles, D&D, chess, tick-tack-toe -- everything. My interest lasts about as long as it takes me to form a strategy for how to play the game, then I'm OUT. This comes with social costs. I can't go to game nights. I dread that moment at dinner parties when the box of Apples To Apples comes out -- the moment it does, I'm looking for the door. I never considered this could be a symptom of a larger cause. I think I need to read this book.
Loved your review, looking forward to reading more of your work!
Such a good writing. I wish I could fly to Austin!
Maybe in games, the rules are fluid so if you don’t like the scoring, it can be adjusted. While in metrics, it’s not something you can control.