Red Velvet Cookies

with white chocolate rum butter glaze

I’m going to go a bit social media insider baseball and talk about a dirty little topic that might be taboo? Or maybe I’m just one of the few people who think about it a lot. I’m talking about hiding likes. As in, the option Instagram (as well as Meta’s other products Facebook and Threads) gives users to hide the number of likes one of their posts got. You can choose to hide the like count on everything you post by default, or you can go into a post’s settings and hide them after the fact.

But that doesn’t mean they go away. The poster can still see them by clickinng where it says “johnsmith and others liked”. Instagram had tested this idea (for two years!) and found that hiding everyone’s like counts with with no option to turn them on was too polarizing, so they just gave people the option and walked away.

In theory, it’s a good idea. Hide likes to alleviate the intense pressure that social media foists on users to perform. But that’s not the way I see it being used most often. I see, instead, users hiding likes of the posts that they think didn’t perform well, and leaving visible the high like counts. And keep in mind, everyone can still see comment count and Reels views count no matter what. And I get it (I’ll explain more later)! By the way, if you have your likes turned off for all your posts and you have found it’s been great for your mental health, I’m so happy for you and think you should keep doing that!

If you’re a creative who relies on social media for a large part of their income, like me, it might have beenn disconcerting to hear about this change. If this catches on, how would we court potential partners? Which is such a stupid thing to have to think about. AND YET! And if like counts started vanishing, does that mean that people stop liking things? I have a theory that likes beget likes: people want to like things that other people have liked and seeing high numbers of engagement sets up the viewer to think, oh, this must be good I’ll keep watching. (I sometimes immediately like whatever appears on my feed first for. no. good. reason.) I don’t think we have the data to back up either of those counterfactuals, though.

On the other end of the spectrum, do we really think that users, creators or not, whose posts have a high engagement (relative to their following) would hide that? I certainly haven’t seen evidence of that. So, sometimes it’s hard not to feel as though hidden likes then become a scarlet letter signifying, whether it’s true or not, I don’t want people seeing this because I’m not proud of it. And if we only see posts boasting high engagement on our feeds (which, with the algorithm, is basically all you will see) doesn’t that just set an unrealistically high bar for everyone else? For what it’s worth, a quick scroll through my personal and professional feeds reveal that the majority of accounts I follow have their likes visible.

I’ll admit even I have wanted to hide likes on posts that bomb. At no other time is it more tempting than when Instagram makes an algorithm change that hurts creators like me — views go down and engagement follows. I did give in once (out of shame!) and after letting it sit for a few minutes I said, fuck that, and turned them back on. To me, it’s just another way that social media platforms give us the tools to show only the good stuff and hide the truth, even when there’s nothing wrong with the truth. It’s also an example of the illusion of choice that these companies are so good at. If there is a mental health crisis thanks to social media, certain companies can wipe their hands and say, Hey, we tried to stop our app from giving teen girls eating disorders — I mean, they can hide the likes now! But in the end, they don’t change the highly addictive nature of their algorithms and design; and the reward systems that can wreck users’ self-esteem.

It recalls the much-hated switch from chronological feeds to algorithm-based recommended feeds to 2016. Instagram later went on to give the chronological feed option back to users in 2022, but they would have to turn it on themselves. Every time they open the app. So, as far as I know, no one uses it regularly. Illusion of choice!

And for what it’s worth, I would be curious to see if turning off all public counts, likes comments, like and plays, for everyone — even though it may be annoying to some users — would actually make headway on the mental health of it all. It won’t happen, and it certainly wouldn’t be enough, but it could be a start.

So, no, you won’t see me turn off my likes any time soon. Sometimes a post bombs and it hurts, especially when you spent a lot of time and energy and love on whatever you made, and especially when, due to black box algorithms, there’s no real way to know what went wrong (if anything!) The feeling is a mix of self-disappointment, shame that other people will see “low” numbers (which 99% of people aren’t actually paying attention to your averages regarding engagement, anyway). Then, if you’re like me, there’s frustration that whatever you’re trying to promote is now, for whatever reason, not getting promoted as much as you’d expected. And, of course it all becomes magnified when it’s a photo or video of you.

In 2022 and 2023, I was testing the waters to see if I could really do easygayoven full time in a sustainable way. Because of this, I took these numbers even more personally because, to me, they were direct bellwethers for my ability to get paid to do this thing I love. And as a creator who’s growing and is fortunate to have an engaged community (thanks to you all!) I also want to show everyone (perhaps self-importantly) that the algorithm gods spare no one and ALSO that, yeah, sometimes the recipes I think are great in my head or my notes app might not always resonate as well as others. LOL.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this, too, so write me, message me on here, in the comments, my email, wherever!

Updates

The recipe for last week’s coffee caramel chocolate tart is now up on easygayoven.com!
I know some of you like to print out recipes (and leave reviews, which really helps me!) and you can do both here. There was a small error in the recipe regarding the heavy cream amount that has now been fixed on the Substack post and the site, so thanks for your understanding on that!

EGO Recommends

Social Media📱: This Washington Post post:
In journalism school we learned why the news has a negativity bias. “We don’t cover the planes that land,” a professor of mine said. Even though it’s important, paying attention to climate crisis/justice news can be really scary. But it helps when publications also report on the stuff that is going well, too, so we don’t just give into doom and give up.

author

Washington Post climate coverage on Instagram: “2023 was Earth’s hottest year in human history, with multiple climate records broken. Despite this, 2023 also was a year with significant positive developments, including in scientific research, conservation, clean energy and more. Research has indicated that uplifting news can provide an emotional buffer against distressing news and feelings of hopelessness — and even encourage optimism or action. So, in that spirit, here are some of the more uplifting climate developments you may have missed. Read more by tapping the link in our bio.”

January 22, 2024

Podcast 🎧: The Dream  
We’re still in January, prime-time for scammers in the “health and wellness” and “self-improvement” space. And this podcast is a really good way to inoculate yourself against those things. In the second half of 2023, I listened to all 3 seasons — each jaw-dropping, heartbreaking and sometimes infuriating in a different way — which uncover and examine the life-ruining work of pyramid schemes, multi-level marketing, and culty life-coaching.

This Week’s Recipe

I feel like I’m the only one who cares that Valentine’s Day is coming up, which is crazy because I’m still single! I haven’t seen many other foodie types posting recipes for it, but since I’m usually so late to put out holiday recipes maybe this is just what it’s like to be on time. Red velvet is so great for recipe developers/baking bloggers because you can put a recipe out around Christmas and it works, but then it also does double duty when you want to pull it out again in February. I didn’t have that foresight this year. I promise promise promise there are more non-chocolate recipes coming up over the next few weeks I kind of just have a one track mind right now.

There are two important variables in this recipe. The first is the difference between using Dutch process cocoa and natural cocoa. I call for Dutch-process in this recipe because I think the flavor is way better, but I’m giving you an option to use natural because Dutch-process cocoa isn’t sold at every grocery store. But you’d be surprised! It’s definitely at Stop&Shop, Whole Foods, Wegmans, and a few other places. You can check easily on any grocery delivery app. Natural cocoa is almost always available.

Because the recipe contains only two tablespoons of cocoa, and natural cocoa is lighter in color, the cookies come out a slightly more vibrant red, if you care about that. But keep in mind, acidic natural cocoa also reacts with the baking soda in the recipe whereas Dutch-process, which has been neutralized through alkalization, does not. This process makes Dutch cocoa more mellow, but it also deepens its color, which is why the red won’t shine through quite as much, but it will still be red! It also means that, if you use natural cocoa, we need to take 1/4 teaspoon of that baking soda out since it will get a boost from the natural cocoa anyway. See the notes for further details.

Above is a good example of the slight color difference imparted by cocoa during my testing rounds. The slightly darker cookies used one tablespoon of natural and one tablespoon of Dutch. The more vibrant ones used all natural. Both have the same amounts of baking soda, but you can tell that the all-natural cookies spread and cracked slightly more.

The second variable is more straightforward. I’m simply giving you the option of dipping the cookies in white chocolate rum butter glaze … or just melted white chocolate. Both require you to get out a double boiler setup or very gently microwave, but the melted white chocolate is just simpler. I tried both and couldn’t decide between them!

Red Velvet Cookies

makes 14 large cookies

Ingredients

Cookies 

• 10 tablespoons unsalted butter, gently melted (142 grams)

• 2/3 cup light brown sugar (130 grams)

• 2/3 cup granulated sugar (147 grams)

• 1 large egg 

• 1/2 teaspoon red food coloring

• 1/2 teaspoon distilled white vinegar

• 1 teaspoon vanilla extract

• 3/4 teaspoon baking soda (1/2 teaspoon if using natural cocoa — see note)

• 1/2 teaspoon baking powder 

• 3/4 teaspoon Diamond Crystal kosher salt

• 2 tablespoons Dutch-process cocoa powder (16 grams)

• 1 3/4 cups all-purpose flour, measured using the spoon-and-sweep method (228 grams)

White Chocolate Rum Butter Glaze

• 2 ounces finely chopped white chocolate (from a bar or wafers, not morsels)

• 2 tablespoons unsalted butter, at room temperature or gently melted (28 grams)

• 1 cup powdered sugar (115 grams)

• 1 teaspoon rum (or vanilla extract)

• 1 tablespoon boiling water 

• Sprinkles (optional)

(or) White Chocolate Dip

• 6-8 ounces finely chopped white chocolate (from a bar or wafers, not morsels)

Directions

1. In a large mixing bowl, whisk together the melted butter and sugars until combined. Add the egg, red food coloring, vinegar and vanilla, and whisk until glossy-looking.

2. Sift the baking soda, baking powder, salt and cocoa powder over top of the mixture. Whisk until completely incorporated, ensuring there are no lumps.

3. Add the flour and fold in with a rubber spatula until the last streaks of white disappear.

4. Chill, covered, in the refrigerator for 30 minutes. Then measure out about 14 dough balls using a 1.5 ounce scoop. Cover the balls and chill them again for an hour.

5. Preheat the oven to 350°F. When the oven is preheated, place 7 dough balls on a parchment-lined half sheet tray.

6. Bake for 8-10 minutes on the middle rack. They should be set on the edges but still slightly underdone in the center. Allow to cool for a minute or two on their tray, then transfer to a wire rack to cool completely. Repeat with the remaining dough.

7. Prepare the glaze. For the white chocolate rum butter glaze: Set a large heat-safe bowl on top of a saucepan or pot filled with an inch of water; the bottom of the bowl should not touch the water. Bring the water to a gentle simmer over low heat. Add the butter and white chocolate to the bowl and allow to melt, stirring occasionally.

8. Once the mixture is melted and totally smooth, transfer the bowl to your work surface and beat in the powdered sugar as well as you can (you may not get it totally combined.) Mix together 1 tablespoon of the simmering water and the rum in a small bowl, then drizzle that into the butter and white chocolate mixture and continue beating until it comes together in a thick glaze.

9. Dip one of the cooled cookies to see if the glaze is thick enough. If it runs off, wait a minute or two, stir well and try again. It should be thick and opaque, but don’t wait too long because it will set up quickly. Dip the cookies about one-third into the glaze then place back on the parchment-lined sheet to set completely. Top the glaze with sprinkles, if desired.

10. For melted white chocolate dip, set a large heat-safe bowl on top of a saucepan or pot filled with an inch of water; the bottom of the bowl should not touch the water. Bring the water to a gentle simmer over low heat. Add the white chocolate to the bowl and allow to melt, stirring occasionally, until about 85% of the chocolate is melted. Remove the bowl from the heat and continue stirring until it’s totally melted and smooth. Dip the cookies about one-third into the glaze then place back on the parchment-lined sheet to set completely. Top the white chocolate with sprinkles, if desired.

Notes:

• If you opt to use natural cocoa, use only 1/2 teaspoon of baking soda. Using natural cocoa will produce a slightly more vibrant red cookie with a bit less flavor, but I understand Dutch-process is sometimes hard to find.