I've had to live through facebook's "redesigns" every so often, being someone who uses their platform for marketing, and this is almost assuredly another shot in the dark. You can tell because its...
I've had to live through facebook's "redesigns" every so often, being someone who uses their platform for marketing, and this is almost assuredly another shot in the dark. You can tell because its flat opposite what they felt was "valuable" and worth emphasizing (personal connections and relationships) 6 months ago while congress was looking.
If I wanted to build a platform to build relationships and personal connections, I feel like an emphasis on events and groups would be how to do it. Going to events and having group chats is how...
If I wanted to build a platform to build relationships and personal connections, I feel like an emphasis on events and groups would be how to do it. Going to events and having group chats is how you build and maintain relationships after all.
This actually seems like a good move to me. The failures of Facebook and Twitter have made it clear to me that the social media model of one-to-many broadcasting + numerous, parallel one-to-one chats is just not good. It's ideally set up for trolling and propaganda. The older formats for socializing on the internet, like IRC or bulletin boards, had their problems but they at least didn't turn into ways to promote scams and noxious ideologies.
That said, I just don't trust Facebook to do a good job at this. Their UX is designed to manipulate people into clicking ads, not to help people express themselves. It's a deep cultural problem from a company that doesn't respect its users privacy or their time. Before propagandists and trolls it was invasive, hectoring spam like FarmVille. There's always something deeply unpleasant that takes advantage of Facebook to make users' lives hell and it comes down to them not valuing the right things when building their products.
That said, I would like to see the internet go more in the direction of multiple, distributed communities instead of one monster site. Facebook was at its best when it was functionally just a business card with a bio and blog attached to it. The more they court advertisers, the more they started pushing their users to interact with each other as though they were advertisers and it hasn't gone well.
And manipulate people into buying "boosts" for their posts (and get addicted to doing that) too... My sister runs a small home business with a decent facebook presence, and I have had to "talk her...
Their UX is designed to manipulate people into clicking ads, not to help people express themselves.
And manipulate people into buying "boosts" for their posts (and get addicted to doing that) too...
My sister runs a small home business with a decent facebook presence, and I have had to "talk her down" from buying boosts dozens of times now. She is already getting more than enough organic traffic through her website, facebook group and word of mouth to keep her fully booked, so she doesn't need that crap.... but since it's been intentionally designed to be incredibly easy and reasonably cheap to do, she keeps getting tempted to boost everything nonetheless.
This is what I thought as I read the description of the changes: Facebook is "inventing" the internet forum. It's moving away from one-on-one connections, and moving towards many-to-many...
For that to work, the company is taking its cues from sites it once considered threats, like Reddit and other community-based social networks
This is what I thought as I read the description of the changes: Facebook is "inventing" the internet forum. It's moving away from one-on-one connections, and moving towards many-to-many connections. You join a group/community/subreddit/forum and engage with the other people there. No more passively viewing photos, status updates, and articles. Now you actively participate in conversations. That's what keeps people engaged, and what keeps them viewing your website longer: discussions with other people.
I'm not sure if that's true. 99% of Reddit's users don't engage. They just vote. And facebook's discussions won't be anonymous. So that will make people even less likely to engage.
Now you actively participate in conversations. That's what keeps people engaged, and what keeps them viewing your website longer: discussions with other people.
I'm not sure if that's true. 99% of Reddit's users don't engage. They just vote.
And facebook's discussions won't be anonymous. So that will make people even less likely to engage.
Voting is a form of engagement. It just doesn’t contribute much. Even in the IRC and Web forum days most users were lurkers. In fact, we encouraged people to lurk until they learned the norms and...
Voting is a form of engagement. It just doesn’t contribute much.
Even in the IRC and Web forum days most users were lurkers. In fact, we encouraged people to lurk until they learned the norms and customs of the forum.
As for anonymity, Disqus and other blog comment systems let people post with their twitter and Facebook accounts and people seem willing. A lot of discussion groups on Facebook are between people who know each other. Hell, the only reason I haven’t deleted my account yet is because my Muay Thai gym posts announcements to their group page on changes to class timings or new events.
But how long do they stay on the website? How many opportunities does Reddit have to display ads to them? If you're involved in a conversation, you'll stay on the site longer (to type your...
99% of Reddit's users don't engage. They just vote.
But how long do they stay on the website? How many opportunities does Reddit have to display ads to them? If you're involved in a conversation, you'll stay on the site longer (to type your comments) and you'll come back more often (to read the replies).
And facebook's discussions won't be anonymous. So that will make people even less likely to engage.
You think? I've been involved in a couple of groups over the years. Some of those people (myself included) spent a lot of time talking to each other. Being identifiable might restrict what you can say, but it won't stop you saying stuff.
I feel like this will actually benefit them the most out of their most recent redesigns. I'm in my early 20s and from what I can tell, my peers only exclusively use Facebook for finding events...
I feel like this will actually benefit them the most out of their most recent redesigns. I'm in my early 20s and from what I can tell, my peers only exclusively use Facebook for finding events that occur in our city as well as groups - in addition to using Messenger for an SMS alternative here. Facebook has no actual purpose for sharing what's on your mind like it used to, so maybe a change in focus on what's currently generating them content and the click to return is a positive change they can make.
I've had to live through facebook's "redesigns" every so often, being someone who uses their platform for marketing, and this is almost assuredly another shot in the dark. You can tell because its flat opposite what they felt was "valuable" and worth emphasizing (personal connections and relationships) 6 months ago while congress was looking.
If I wanted to build a platform to build relationships and personal connections, I feel like an emphasis on events and groups would be how to do it. Going to events and having group chats is how you build and maintain relationships after all.
This actually seems like a good move to me. The failures of Facebook and Twitter have made it clear to me that the social media model of one-to-many broadcasting + numerous, parallel one-to-one chats is just not good. It's ideally set up for trolling and propaganda. The older formats for socializing on the internet, like IRC or bulletin boards, had their problems but they at least didn't turn into ways to promote scams and noxious ideologies.
That said, I just don't trust Facebook to do a good job at this. Their UX is designed to manipulate people into clicking ads, not to help people express themselves. It's a deep cultural problem from a company that doesn't respect its users privacy or their time. Before propagandists and trolls it was invasive, hectoring spam like FarmVille. There's always something deeply unpleasant that takes advantage of Facebook to make users' lives hell and it comes down to them not valuing the right things when building their products.
That said, I would like to see the internet go more in the direction of multiple, distributed communities instead of one monster site. Facebook was at its best when it was functionally just a business card with a bio and blog attached to it. The more they court advertisers, the more they started pushing their users to interact with each other as though they were advertisers and it hasn't gone well.
And manipulate people into buying "boosts" for their posts (and get addicted to doing that) too...
My sister runs a small home business with a decent facebook presence, and I have had to "talk her down" from buying boosts dozens of times now. She is already getting more than enough organic traffic through her website, facebook group and word of mouth to keep her fully booked, so she doesn't need that crap.... but since it's been intentionally designed to be incredibly easy and reasonably cheap to do, she keeps getting tempted to boost everything nonetheless.
This is what I thought as I read the description of the changes: Facebook is "inventing" the internet forum. It's moving away from one-on-one connections, and moving towards many-to-many connections. You join a group/community/subreddit/forum and engage with the other people there. No more passively viewing photos, status updates, and articles. Now you actively participate in conversations. That's what keeps people engaged, and what keeps them viewing your website longer: discussions with other people.
I'm not sure if that's true. 99% of Reddit's users don't engage. They just vote.
And facebook's discussions won't be anonymous. So that will make people even less likely to engage.
Voting is a form of engagement. It just doesn’t contribute much.
Even in the IRC and Web forum days most users were lurkers. In fact, we encouraged people to lurk until they learned the norms and customs of the forum.
As for anonymity, Disqus and other blog comment systems let people post with their twitter and Facebook accounts and people seem willing. A lot of discussion groups on Facebook are between people who know each other. Hell, the only reason I haven’t deleted my account yet is because my Muay Thai gym posts announcements to their group page on changes to class timings or new events.
But how long do they stay on the website? How many opportunities does Reddit have to display ads to them? If you're involved in a conversation, you'll stay on the site longer (to type your comments) and you'll come back more often (to read the replies).
You think? I've been involved in a couple of groups over the years. Some of those people (myself included) spent a lot of time talking to each other. Being identifiable might restrict what you can say, but it won't stop you saying stuff.
I feel like this will actually benefit them the most out of their most recent redesigns. I'm in my early 20s and from what I can tell, my peers only exclusively use Facebook for finding events that occur in our city as well as groups - in addition to using Messenger for an SMS alternative here. Facebook has no actual purpose for sharing what's on your mind like it used to, so maybe a change in focus on what's currently generating them content and the click to return is a positive change they can make.
Are they going to implement any new data privacy features with that redesign, does anyone know?
Fair point.