How Google Can Beat Facebook Without Google Plus - The Atlantic
This is the key paragraph:
"Facebook is about you sharing with the world. Google Plus is about Google understanding you. See the difference? This is why people sometimes say that Google doesn't get social. People don't join Facebook so Facebook can understand them better! In fact, the better Facebook understands them, the more wary of the service they get."
Yeah, Google seems to carry their info-centric perspective to everything they do, which is impressively consistent and leverages their core competencies but social tools must lead with user experience to really scale. This is where FB succeeds. Problem is FB needs to get more info-centric to effectively monetize and, like you highlighted, we didn't come here for that, okay?
We came to FB to selectively infuse our digital identities with our real lives.
And now? Do you still come to Facebook for that?
Because there's a growing group of people who aren't coming to Facebook as much.
FB might have peaked, which might explain investor reluctactance. Okay, no might about it.
Frankly, I'm tired of FB. But it's the social media equivalent of a booty call.
Your Facebook fatigue is due to much noise, not enough signal, or something else?
I have noticed a trend of friends who have deactivated accounts or seriously curtailed usage. I inquired about it and some say they're married with kids now and don't necessarily want timeline advertising their previous lives.
I can definitely see this becoming a major trend. Who wants to go back through years of activity and selectively edit? Better to just kill it. Many people may not want a one-stop-shop for their lives.
Facebook, you may have an issue on your hands: If people don't feel privacy controls are adequate and turnkey, they might just bail altogether.
Wow, I've been giving this a lot of thought, Adam! Idont know if it's a signal/noise issue; I've gotgood (and fast) at filtering. Let me ponder a while longer.
Eric's got it right: It's so much easier to delete an account than sift through everything.
Facebook might be shocked at how willing consumers are to abandon their accounts.
Once upon a time, MySpace was #1. Now, they're less than zero.
Unless it's worth sifting through. FB does some things brilliantly. Again, it's an easy hookup , especially with a mobile device.
Broadly: FB allows me to maintain a loose, low-investment tether with my friends/fam. Specifically: 1) Again, easy smart-phone shares, 2) chats and messaging, 3) pokes (fun, lowest investment), and 4) ability to choose level of privacy at the per-post level <-- important to me. Anecdotally: My neighbor has a jewelry business on Etsy. I frequently like her offerings. An old chum checked out my likes. She's now my neighbor's best customer. Low investment, large reward (neighborliness).
Finally: FB is what it is. LOW INVESTMENT.
There's something to be said for a low investment site.
It's easier to maintain than, say, a blog...
Like a blog, it requires filling in text boxes.
I never really thought of Facebook as a place.
No. These are people *I've* selected for membership. I can de-select or ignore them if they become annoying.
Is being the bouncer and doorman like being the judge, judy, and executioner?
You May Also Like:
