Graze Raises $1M to Take Back Social Media from Algorithmic Control
Backed by Betaworks and Salesforce Ventures, Graze Puts Users in Charge of Their FeedsPORTLAND, Ore., April 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Social media has long been dictated by opaque algorithms, but Graze is proving there's another way. Today, the company announced $1 million in pre-seed funding to fuel its mission of empowering users to create and control their own social media feeds on Bluesky. Instead of being force-fed content by traditional platforms, individuals and organizations can now build their own custom feeds — taking back control from algorithm-driven gatekeeping.
The round was led by Betaworks and Salesforce Ventures, with additional backing from Factorial, Apertu Capital, Skyseed, and angel investors from Mozilla and Protocol Labs.
'Betaworks has long been a backer of and believer in the open web and Graze represents a huge step forward in making social media a more open, user-controlled environment,' said Jordan Crook, partner at Betaworks. 'Together with Bluesky, the Graze team is building a participatory social media culture where feeds are created, curated, and consumed by individual users.'
'At Graze, we're committed to dismantling the restrictive barriers of traditional social media platforms,' said Peat Bakke, CEO and co-founder of Graze. "By leveraging open infrastructure, we're empowering users to curate their own content experiences, ensuring they have the autonomy to shape their social media interactions according to their preferences.'
A New Era of Social Media is Taking Shape
Journalists and news outlets are leaving traditional social media in large numbers, seeking better platforms to share their stories. The Guardian, for example, stopped posting on X over concerns about harmful content and has turned to Bluesky instead. The shift is already having a tangible impact—traffic from Bluesky to The Guardian's website is now twice that of Threads, and nearly 1 million people have accessed news directly through feeds created on the Graze platform. The trend is clear: both journalists and readers are moving toward independent, user-driven platforms.
"Graze is already showing real traction on Bluesky. Their success highlights that people want meaningful control over their social feeds," said Rose Wang, COO of Bluesky.
Since its launch in November 2024, Graze has delivered curated content to approximately 1.8 million Bluesky users, representing a significant portion of the platform's active user base. This rapid adoption highlights the growing demand for personalized, algorithm-free content experiences.
Empowering Media and Content Creators
Graze equips media brands and content creators with the tools they need to take back control of how their content is distributed and consumed. With Graze, they can:
Boost Visibility – Custom feeds ensure content reaches targeted audiences, increasing engagement.
Maintain Editorial Integrity – Full control over feeds allows creators to align content with their brand's voice and values.
Access In-Depth Analytics – Data-driven insights help optimize content strategies based on real audience interactions.
Fueling Developer Innovation on Bluesky
Graze also empowers developers by offering flexible tools to build and customize new experiences on Bluesky, including:
No-Code Feed Creation – A visual editor enables quick, custom feed design without complex coding.
Advanced Content Filtering – Support for complex logic combinations allows for fine-tuned content curation.
Real-Time Updates – Instant feed updates ensure users always get the most current content.
The Future of Social Media is Built for Users, Not Billionaires
'Social media shouldn't be controlled by billionaires, it should belong to the people," said Devin Gaffney, CTO and co-founder of Graze. "We've moved beyond the outdated, closed-platform model by embracing an open-source ecosystem that puts users and creators in control. The future of social media is about transparency, choice, and giving people the power to shape their own experience.'
As Bluesky continues to gain momentum, Graze is committed to accelerating its growth, with a vision to help Bluesky reach 100 million users by the end of the year. By prioritizing openness, autonomy, and user-driven content, Graze is reshaping the future of social media, one feed at a time.
About GrazeGraze enables users to create custom feeds on Bluesky, providing tools that allow individuals and organizations to design and control their social media experience. By offering sophisticated building blocks akin to those used by major social media companies, Graze empowers users to curate content that aligns with their interests and values. Committed to transparency and user empowerment, Graze is redefining how people interact with social media. For more information, visit https://graze.social/
Media Contact:
Juliet TravisLiftoff Communicationsjuliet@liftoffcommunications.com
A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/b8416b0b-e747-4187-b53c-9115fafa6114
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
19 hours ago
- Washington Post
The Bluesky bubble hurts liberals and their causes
Ever since Elon Musk bought Twitter, changed the social media site's name to X and altered its moderation policies, progressives have been hunting for a substitute. To judge how their search is going, consider a recent item from Politico's Playbook, which notes that 'a number of prominent commentators, experts and groups' are pledging to post on other platforms before X. 'The 'X-last' strategy,' says Playbook, 'led by Indivisible and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, is an effort to shift discourse from Elon Musk's platform to Bluesky.' Note that they're not demanding that people stop posting to X. They're just asking them to post a bit less. It's certainly inventive, but a little wistful, as though they're aware how unlikely this is to work. A recent Pew Research Center analysis found that many news influencers have Bluesky accounts (I'm one of them) but that, like me, two-thirds post irregularly. By contrast, more than 80 percent still post to X on most days. Engagement on Bluesky appears to have peaked in mid-November. It's now down about 50 percent, and the decline shows no sign of leveling out. This is the tyranny of social media network effects. When a network grows, each new user makes it more valuable to every other user, enabling exponential growth. When the users start leaving, however, those network effects also hasten the decline. Nor is this process likely to be halted by organizing your pals and exhorting people to be better, or getting progressive writers to post to Bluesky before X. Yes, seeding platforms early with a small group of influential individuals can help it grow, as other users flock to be around them. But when that movement is organized by liberal groups, it's most likely to appeal to folks who are very interested in progressive politics — which is to say, the other people who have already moved to Bluesky. You can't blame them for trying, I suppose. But wait, actually, I can. Because even if this works, moving progressives off X into Bluesky's beautiful blue bubble isn't a great idea for the movement. This effort isn't just a doomed attempt to re-create the old Twitter. It's likely to sap already-waning progressive influence and make the movement itself less politically effective. Consider why progressive groups are so eager to hasten the demise of X and move their users to other platforms. One reason is simply that they are mad at Musk for supporting Donald Trump and allowing the alt-right to flourish on X. But another is that they are trying to duplicate what used to be an incredible platform for liberal influence. For roughly a decade, Twitter hosted what is lightheartedly called the 'national conversation' on issues of the day, particularly social justice and public health. Twitter never had that many users, compared with Instagram or Facebook. But it had a big group of influential users — politicians, policymakers, journalists and academics, all of whom were engaged in a 24/7 conversation about politics and current events. That was a boon to progressives, who wielded outsize influence on the platform because they were early adopters who outnumbered the conservatives. They were also better organized and better networked, and had the sympathy of Twitter's professional-class employees, who proved increasingly susceptible to liberals' demands for tighter moderation policies on things such as using male pronouns to refer to a transgender woman. Moderation suppressed conservative users and stories that hurt the left — most notoriously, the story about Hunter Biden's laptop, which Twitter throttled as 'disinformation' in the run-up to the 2020 election. Of course, progressive Twitter mobs also policed the discourse themselves, securing high-profile firings that made many people afraid to cross them. Thus, that national conversation ended up skewed toward liberal views, creating the illusion that their ideas were more popular than they actually were. That's a major reason that institutions went all-in on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, and why the 2020 Democratic primary field moved so far to the left that Kamala Harris was still struggling to backtrack four years later. All that changed when Musk bought Twitter. It's not surprising that progressives want to return to the good old days. But it's not working, and I'm skeptical it ever will. The people who have migrated to Bluesky tend to be those who feel the most visceral disgust for Musk and Trump, plus a smattering of those who are merely curious and another smattering who are tired of the AI slop and unregenerate racism that increasingly pollutes their X feeds. Because the Musk and Trump haters are the largest and most passionate group, the result is something of an echo chamber where it's hard to get positive engagement unless you're saying things progressives want to hear — and where the negative engagement on things they don't want to hear can be intense. That's true even for content that isn't obviously political: Ethan Mollick, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who studies AI, recently announced that he'll be limiting his Bluesky posting because AI discussions on the platform are too 'fraught.' All this is pretty off-putting for folks who aren't already rather progressive, and that creates a threefold problem for the ones who dream of getting the old band back together. Most obviously, it makes it hard for the platform to build a large enough userbase for the company to become financially self-sustaining, or for liberals to amass the influence they wielded on old Twitter. There, they accumulated power by shaping the contours of a conversation that included a lot of non-progressives. On Bluesky, they're mostly talking among themselves. One can say the same about Truth Social, of course, but that's not an example the left should be eager to emulate. Segregating yourself in a political silo amplifies any political movement's worst tendencies, giving free rein to your most toxic adherents and cutting you off from vital feedback about, say, your unpopular tariff policies. Something similar has happened on Bluesky. The nasty fringe has become even nastier: A Bluesky technical adviser recently felt the need to clarify that 'The 'let's tell anyone we don't like to kill themselves' crowd are not welcome here' because left-wing trolls kept urging people who disagreed with them to commit suicide. And without the leavening influence of their opponents, Bluesky discourse appears even more censorious and doctrinaire than what progressives were saying on old Twitter. When you never hear from the other side, it's pretty easy to talk yourself into a political dead end. That might be enough for the political dead-enders. But it's a terrible mistake for any political movement that actually hopes to rack up some durable victories.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Hackers discover Nintendo Switch 2 exploit one day after launch — minor hack allows running custom code on top of OS
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Some enterprising hackers have already discovered an exploit on the just-launched Nintendo Switch 2. Bluesky user David Buchanan was the first to show off the exploit, where he apparently discovered a weakness in the console's shared library. This vulnerability, called a userland Return-Oriented Programming exploit, allows Buchanan to manipulate a program by overwriting its return address to another piece of code. When chained together, this can force the system to work in an unintended manner — in this case, display custom checkerboard graphics. Since this is only a userland exploit, it only runs on the user level and does not affect the Switch 2's kernel, nor does it give you root access to the device. Buchanan said that this has no practical purpose, meaning this won't jailbreak the console and allow users to modify it in unintended ways. They even admitted that they can't prove that they're running an exploit instead of just playing a YouTube video, although other developers and modders have confirmed that the exploit does exist. The Japanese gaming giant is known for proactively protecting its intellectual property rights. It has gotten to the point that the company said it may brick your console if you use it to modify Nintendo Account Services, and the Switch 2 user agreement is pretty firm about not modifying software. Since the Switch 2 has just been released, it will likely take weeks, months, or even years before someone discovers a way to defeat the company's built-in protections on the handheld. If and when someone finally jailbreaks the Nintendo Switch 2 and creates a custom homebrew OS, we can then see how Nintendo will react. Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News to get our up-to-date news, analysis, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Bonfire's new software lets users build their own social communities, free from platform control
Bonfire Social, a new framework for building communities on the open social web, launched on Thursday during the FediForum online conference. While Bonfire Social is a federated app, meaning it's powered by the same underlying protocol as Mastodon (ActivityPub), it's designed to be more modular and more customizable. That means communities on Bonfire have more control over how the app functions, which features and defaults are in place, and what their own roadmap and priorities will include. There's a decidedly disruptive bent to the software, which describes itself as a place where "all living beings thrive and communities flourish, free from private interest and capitalistic control." In other words, its mission is to build social software where people get to make the decisions, not Big Tech platform makers like Meta or Google. The organization itself runs as a nonprofit funded by donations and grants, and it doesn't take venture capital. Its code is open source, and it works in collaboration with the communities and researchers that use it to build and enhance online digital spaces. Bonfire Social, now offered as a 1.0 Release Candidate ahead of the public release, is just one representation of what Bonfire offers. Bonfire calls it a "flavor." Each flavor is a preconfigured bundle of Bonfire extensions, features, and defaults, sort of like a starting template. When a community opts to run a particular "flavor," it gets to govern the app as it sees fit, adding its own extensions and determining its own roadmap for product changes. This puts the social software back under users' control, instead of being subject to the whims of a platform maker with ever-changing feature sets and algorithms. The organization is already developing other flavors, like Bonfire Community and Open Science, and the Bonfire software lets any other community create their own version. In Bonfire Social, users will recognize familiar features, like feeds and tools to follow users, share posts, create user profiles, flag or block content, and more. However, it also offers other tools and features that traditional social networks may not have, like tools for customizing feeds, support for nested discussions, the ability to host multiple profiles per user, rich-text posts, and access control features. Custom feeds are a key differentiation between Bonfire and traditional social media apps. Though the idea of following custom feeds is something that's been popularized by newer social networks like Bluesky or social browsers like Flipboard's Surf, the tools to actually create those feeds are maintained by third parties. Bonfire instead offers its own custom feed-building tools in a simple interface that doesn't require users to understand coding. To build feeds, users can filter and sort content by type, date, engagement level, source instance, and more, including something it calls "circles." Those who lived through the Google+ era of social networks may be familiar with the concept of Circles. On Google's social network, users organized contacts into groups, called Circles, for optimized sharing. That concept lives on at Bonfire, where a circle represents a list of people. That can be a group of friends, a fan group, local users, organizers at a mutual aid group, or anything else users can come up with. These circles are private by default but can be shared with others. Another unique feature on Bonfire Social is Boundaries, which let you control who can see or engage with your content. For instance, you could share a post with a number of your circles, but only allow one specific circle's members to comment. Bonfire also supports threaded conversations (nested discussions) where replies can branch out into their own sub-threads. This can be useful for communities where deeper discussions and collaboration are more valuable than those where everyone competes for attention. Plus, Bonfire users can customize the app using one of the 16 built-in themes, or they can design their own layout and pick their own colors and fonts. Accounts on Bonfire can also host multiple profiles that have their own followers, content, and settings. This could be useful for those who simply prefer to have both public and private profiles, but also for those who need to share a given profile with others -- like a profile for a business, a publication, a collective, or a project team. Other features available at launch include PWA support for mobile devices, community blocklists, custom emoji support, full-text search (with opt out), direct messages, private group discussions (also with nested threads), and more. Extensions, which add different features, can be enabled or disabled by both admins and users. Admins simply decide what the defaults are. That means users could turn on or off features they don't like, even core features such as likes or boosts (the federated version of the retweet/repost). Because Bonfire is built on ActivityPub, it also federates with Mastodon, PeerTube, Mobilizon, and others. The software is meant to be self-installed, though work to develop a hosting network is under way. For those who just want to kick the tires, a demo instance is available. This article originally appeared on TechCrunch at Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
