We understand there are legitimate and well intentioned use cases for knowing who has seen your content. That's why Blink has a number of ways for you to achieve this.
For example, we provide open and transparent post analytics and we have a specific priority post available which contains a mandatory manual acknowledgement for audit or peace of mind.
We don't do any of this with messages in chats. We strongly believe that read-mesage indicators are unhelpful in the work environment.
They can mislead the sender, force ill-considered responses, make recipients feel under pressure and they introduce a feeling of mistrust.
Blink has reliable message delivery. If you send a message to a chat, we guarentee that every member has received it!
We can't however make any guarentee that they have actually read it. No-one can.
Indicating that a chat message was on screen is different from knowing it has been seen.
In busy chats at work, people frequently skim-read up and down the chat history, particularly when catching up after hours (and days!) away or trying to avoid parts of a conversation that may have gone off topic.
We think the risk of chat messages being marked as read but actually going unseen by the user is high enough for the metric to be unreliable.
It's why Blink uses other ways to measure reach in and guarentee attention.
Our reasoning isn't just anecdotal. Alongside the collective experience of the Blink team, there are lots of write-ups and discussions about how read receipts make people feel and also measured evidence emerging that backs up some of our thinking.
We're open minded about the decisions we make at Blink and we do revisit them, particularly as the workplace evolves. We want our customers and their employees to get the greatest value possible out of Blink but currently there is no demand or strong use-case for us to reconsider our current position.