There’s no longer any question that Threads and Bluesky have created the most viable alternatives to the platform once known as Twitter. But while the two services may share some of the same goals, they’ve shown very different visions for how text-based social networks should operate.
Threads, of course, is controlled by Meta, which is controlled by Mark Zuckerberg. And though the company has claimed to embrace “public conversation,” it has also consistently put its thumb on the scale to encourage certain types of speech over others. The company throttled “political” content in an election year, forcing users to tweak their settings to enable posts about elections or “social topics” to appear in their “for you” feed.
This desire to limit any of what Meta described as “potentially sensitive” content has also led to some questionable moderation decisions. For months, the app prevented users from searching for some topics, including those related to COVID-19 and vaccines. Those limits have since been lifted, but there have been numerous and inexplicable instances of other moderation failures on Threads.
In October, Instagram head Adam Mosseri admitted the company had “found mistakes and made changes” after users reported their accounts had been penalized for using mundane words like “saltines” and “cracker.” Earlier this month,, Meta’s communications director Andy Stone apologized after users noted that searches for posts about Austin Tice, the American journalist who disappeared in Syria in 2012, were blocked on the app because the content “may be associated with the sale of drugs.” Stone didn’t offer an explanation but said the issue has been addressed.
Bluesky, on the other hand, has taken less of a top-down approach to moderation. While the company employs some of its own moderators to enforce “baseline moderation,” users have a lot of control over how much questionable or harmful content they want to see. Blueksy also allows people to create their own moderation services for an even more custom experience.
“Moderation is in many ways, like governance,” Bluesky CEO Jay Graber told me earlier this year. “And setting the norms of a social space, we don’t think one person or one company should be unilaterally deciding that for an entire ecosystem where people are having public conversations important to the state of the world.”
That philosophy plays out in other important ways. Twitter was never a major source of traffic for most publishers, even before Elon Musk’s takeover. But the platform once played a vital role in the news ecosystem. At a time when Elon Musk has acknowledged that X penalizes posts with links and Threads’ top exec has said that Meta doesn’t want to “encourage” hard news, Bluesky’s leaders have actually tried to foster link sharing, and several publishers have reported seeing significantly more traffic from Bluesky, compared with Threads and X.
But perhaps the most obvious difference between Meta and Bluesky’s approach is in what order posts even appear. Bluesky defaults to a reverse chronological feed that shows posts from accounts you follow. Users can also choose to add custom feeds based on hundreds of different topics. For example, I follow a “cat pics” feed that surfaces posts with photos of cats and a “trending news” feed that surfaces links to news stories that are being shared widely on the platform.
And while Meta has recently come out with its own version of custom feeds, the app still defaults to an algorithmic “for you” feed that surfaces a mix of content users actually want and unasked-for drivel that’s so random and bizarre it’s been compared to a gas leak. (Meta said it would test allowing users to make their following feed the default, but hasn’t provided an update.) It’s also telling that even the content creators getting paid hundreds or thousands of dollars to post on Threads don’t really understand the platform.
There are even more significant changes coming in 2025. While both Threads and Bluesky have so far been blissfully ad-free, both services will need to eventually make money.
Bluesky has so far experimented with other ways of making money, including selling custom domains and an upcoming subscription service that will offer extra features to paying users. Though Graber hasn’t entirely ruled out advertising, she’s also been clear that she doesn’t want to “enshittify” the service for the sake of advertising.
Threads, on the other hand, is already attached to Meta’s multi-billion dollar ad machine, an entity so intrusive many people believe the company’s apps literally listen to their conversations (a theory that’s been repeatedly debunked.) Though Zuckerberg has indicated the company isn’t in a rush to turn Threads into a “very large business,” it could see its first ads in January, according to reports, and there’s little reason to believe Meta won’t eventually employ the same playbook it has with all its other services.
All this makes Bluesky even more of an underdog. Threads is already more than 10 times its size and Meta has made it clear it has no problem using its copy-or-kill tactics against the upstart.
But that’s also exactly why so many Bluesky users fervently believe that the platform is the one that “has the juice.” While Threads and X put public conversations in the hands of autocratic billionaires, Bluesky is an independent entity and has structured its platform much more democratically. The platform has had its share of moderation controversies, but it puts far more control in the hands of its users. It’s welcomed developers, who have created dozens of third-party apps for the service.
All that may not ultimately be enough to fend off Meta, which can afford to throw billions of dollars at Threads. But Bluesky’s vision for an open-source decentralized platform is about much more than becoming the next big social media site. “We set out to change the way social media works from the bottom up,” Graber said during a recent press event. “I want us to have choice over what we see.”
