There is an evil temptation that far too many companies are having trouble resisting – the temptation to launch a new product or service on Facebook.
Every month, when the number of Facebook users seem to go up by 100 million or so – to a current tally of 750 million (let’s be serious, about half are most likely fictional or animals), the CEOs of most entertainment and technology companies get the crazy urge to somehow “tap into that customer base.”
This crazy urge must be resisted. Why? So Facebook is destroyed and the people of the world can go on to a much more interesting existence.
In my opinion, doing business with Facebook is the equivalent of doing business with China. Companies feel they need break into the Chinese market because there is FREAKING 1.3 BILLION PEOPLE THERE! “If we just get 0.0001% we’ll be successful. It’s a no brainer!”
And nearly every company goes there with their hat in their hand – giving every insane concession imaginable just to get in the door – and, eventually, come home with a giant footprint on their ass.
Reminder: The Chinese government can do whatever they want. The deal signed means nothing. If they don’t like your attitude or your product or just feel you’re getting a little “too friendly”, they’ll cut you off and send you home a miserable failure. And it doesn’t matter how many cartons of cigarettes or bottles of Slivovitz you give local officials. When it’s over, it’s over.
This is also true of Facebook.
I firmly believe Facebook could absolutely destroy Zynga (and numerous other companies) overnight. They have that power.
Granted, there is too much money at stake with Zynga’s upcoming IPO, so they probably won’t exert that power. But do you think the Zynga executives are going to do anything to antagonize Facebook… ever? Mark Zuckerberg knows the power he has over Mark Pincus.
That is another reason why Facebook must be stopped. Too many people are believing the hype and are afraid of being left behind.
Every day, Facebook dominates technology news. Press release after press release announces Facebook’s new initiatives and services. Their PR department sends out a press release, websites rewrite them slightly and, pow, you have technology news with a narrative controlled by… Facebook.
This week came a “leak” that they will be going into the Music business by blending streaming services such as Spotify, rdio and MOG into the Facebook user experience.
After all, why should anyone have to leave Facebook to listen to music? Why should anyone have to leave Facebook ever?
(I am working on a product that integrates Facebook into my morning shower. There must be a way to combine my Facebook news feed with the water from the shower head so my friend’s status updates directly enter my pores and absorb into my brain. But I digress….)
Spotify is a great service. They don’t need Facebook. People on Facebook don’t complain about having to toggle away from Facebook in order to go onto Spotify. It ain’t broke, don’t fix it!
Spotify and other media companies need to resist the temptation of the 750 million non-paying users (which includes millions of dogs and cats who don’t really care what songs they listen to).
And look at this growth chart (left). 7.3 billion users in 2015 vs. only 7.2 billion people alive on the planet!
Major media companies (including my parent company Manka Bros. Studios) need to realize that Facebook needs them more than they need Facebook. (Manka Bros. is actually working on a ‘Facebook Killer’ – Caligula – to launch later this year but I fear it will be more of the same.)
Content is the driver of everything in media. Put a great movie on a crappy 13 inch black & white TV and it’s still a great movie and people will watch it. Put a shitty movie on a 110″ inch HD television screen with Dolby SurroundSound, movie lighting and a cocktail, and it’s still a shitty movie that no one will watch.
Facebook needs to realize that the only reason they are popular is because we all have this urge to see what our friends from high school and college look like now. That’s it really. It’s not to watch “The Dark Knight” for 30 Facebook Credits or buy pigs on “Farmville” (millions do it, I know, and why not? – it’s right there in front of us and we’re freakin’ bored with our lives).
But I think it’s time to break away and see what else is out there in the world.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
Jill I have one question. Do you really believe this stuff you are typing?
To me, I would file you under the label “Shock Blogger.”
This is not an insult. Seriously it’s a compliment. Like a “shock jock” or otherwise, you’ve done a great job at getting people riled up. Look at all of these comments. Being a shock blogger could be a great new marketing technique. Heck I found this link on LinkedIn. Shock Blogger is genius.
What I think is that you really don’t believe the stuff you are typing. I think you’re going for the shock blogger affect. Because if you do believe this stuff, you’re actually playing in to facebook’s plan. Even bad publicity is good publicity.
Hey Chad,
Yeah, crazy as it sounds, I do believe the stuff I am typing. I get the shock blogger thing – but I do believe Facebook is dangerous. Sounds weird – it’s just a little chatting and photo posting website, isn’t it? Seems harmless. I mean, just don’t go to it if you don’t like it, right? And as for “even bad publicity is good publicity” – you’ll notice, in the media, there is no bad publicity for Facebook. Only the users of Facebook seem to hate the new changes and, in general, don’t like Facebook. Look at the posts on any blog out there – most are incensed. But, for some reason, almost all the journalists and major media companies seem to be gushing. Perhaps they don’t want to piss off Facebook because they will need them in the future – and this is what is frightening to me. Too much power and control. But I don’t believe they will last and are on the road to becoming worthless (as I’ve said here: http://mankabros.com/blogs/onmedea/2010/07/01/facebook-is-worthless/ )
In a couple of years I’m sure I’ll shock blogging about Google + and their power.
Jill, it does sound crazy. Especially when you say that you do believe these things you are typing. What I believe is that you have either misinterpreted the meaning of the terms “dangerous” and “harmless” or you are using these strong words to generate an effective comment-posting reaction, you shock blogger you 😉
Posting photos and chatting is harmless.
Dangerous is someone with a loaded weapon pointed in your direction.
What facebook has done with/for the internet and social media is incredibly innovative and revolutionary. They were the first social network to use people’s real names, and thereby establish a social graph of real people. Real people are the only ones worth marketing an advertising campaign because they spend real money. This hardly makes them worthless. This makes them incredibly valuable.
This is why the media are gushing, not because they fear facebook. The media was around long before and will continue to be around long after (if ever such a thing, which I don’t believe there to be, a respectful disagreement to your statement) facebook is not here.
The fact that facebook can not only sell advertisement but prove, by means of actual statistical data, that their advertisement has indeed reached the intended market segment is undoubted proof as to why print advertisement dollars are in sharp decline: there is no measurable return on investment.
As far as them having “Too much power and control,” I don’t think their ownership of yours, mine and 700 million other users’ depth of information on the social graph and their ability to use that data to buy and sell advertisement hardly compares with China’s ownership of US debt.
Oh, Chad (or should I call you Facebook troll #12) – who is being naive now. I do agree with your definition of dangerous – it certainly isn’t life or death – but if we just say that all the time and don’t ever raise the stakes, everything is trivial. Bank failing is trivial. Facebook having our information is trivial. The Chiefs going 0-2 and being considered one of the worst football teams in NFL history is trivial. But these things have some meaning to me in my average life. Sure, Facebook is not a war zone – but I still think they are dangerous (though not physically dangerous). I’m sorry I’m rambling but I’m running out the door to a 5 year old soccer game. Don’t worry about the Chinese debt – we just won’t pay it. Simple. They would never pay us if they owed us money. We won’t pay them. Simple.
Jill is spot-on. FB owns you (what you do, your friends network, your happy moments, your political commentary,…). What will they do w/ it? Who will they sell/give it to? They have their finger on 750m people. The more popular, the more control over how the World interacts, info, music,… I’m amazed at the short-sightedness of folks like ‘the chad.’
Chad/Facebrook troll #12,
Jill’s got a handle on “life” as we know it, or how Facebook would have us know it.
….into …and Shock Blogger affect/effect…?? I see Jill preferring the verb, effect!
We will lose the nuances that give tune if we ignore the basics, which I know unfortunately education in the 70’s and early 80’s attempted to disenfranchise.
Hysterical.
Facebook does not create content. Facebook users do that. Facebook just tries to get more of it in front of us.
And somehow you have twisted that into life as “Facebook would have us know it.”
I also enjoyed the childish manner in which you utterly failed to provide anything even remotely resembling a fact and instead engaged in the tried-and-true diversionary tactic of negating the argument by negating the person.
I mean really, “Facebook troll #12” as the opener?
smdh
Wow, JBoston – you have just proved to the world that the Facebook PR army exists. I would think you would hide your identity a little better than that.
And you’ll say: “What the F are you talking about, B, I’m just a normal person who happens to love and defend Facebook because it’s awesome. I have nothing to do with the site. I just think it’s the best and you are a mean B***H because you attack. What have they done to you? Good question, JBoston. I’m not quite sure what they have done to me. But I do know what they have done to you. Pity.
I agree with Chad- even though his name is Chad.
Honestly this article just made me want to log onto Facebook and share it with my friends which just encourages more publicity, like he said. I think what Jill Kennedy needs to remember is that Facebook is a business. When have you ever heard a businessman say “I think we need to take our product down a notch.” Never. Facebook is just trying to make the product better for the user. Yes, there are slip ups and questionable problems that arise within the FB company, but users knowingly take the risks by having an account. Once the risk is too high, we’ll abandon it for some fresh air like Jill. I think what it comes down to in the end is “to each his own.” I really enjoy how you can like this article on FB by the way.
It’s true, Jezabel, Facebook is – I suppose – a business. According to Mark Zuckerberg money isn’t really the reason he is doing it (so he says). Here’s the thing. For about 700 million of the 800 million users out there (many are dogs and fictional characters and aliases – but I digress), Facebook is a place to send notes to their friends, post photos, see how fat high school classmates got over the years, etc. They don’t realize that if my mom said to one of her friends on Facebook – “We’re thinking of selling our house” – and then suddenly ads appear next to her profile and emails are sent to her Inbox from brokers attempting to get her business – that there is a connection. And that little email will follow my parents around over and over. It’s like in Glengarry Glen Ross when the salesmen just keep calling on this poor family over and over again whose only crime was filling out an information card and asking for a brochure. It’s just too much – that’s all. And a pretty shitty business if you ask me.
Finally you understand my revolution. Love the graphic.
Thank you Chairman Mao! I used to carry a little booklet with your sayings which were fantastic but thank God you aren’t alive today.
We can learn from the past and I don’t want it to involve Facebook/The Borg, i.e., Resistance is futile.
Jill, you’re a good writer and I’m happy to know that you understand the reasons beneath the media, such as it is, today. Keep up the good work!
Oh, I’m alive, Patricia. Alive like a fox!
Thanks Patricia – and now FB has formed a political action committee. I know all big media has them – it shouldn’t be too alarming. But with FB’s plan to become the main entry to the internet – I’m not sure I like the idea of what they would do in terms of privacy laws if they were to get political influence.
Hello,
Just my 2c; I seem to disagree with this:
“Every day, Facebook dominates technology news. Press release after press release announces Facebook’s new initiatives and services. Their PR department sends out a press release, websites rewrite them slightly and, pow, you have technology news with a narrative controlled by… Facebook.”
I don’t think Facebook dominates the tech news. I was educated in tech industry and work in tech industry, and even in the social industry, Facebook is big… but not dominating. By far – in my honest opinion.
If anything is dominating, that would be Google.
http://gizmodo.com/5840045/google-smash-why-no-industry-is-safe
I just thought I need to post that since it sounds like a similar article to your blog, but swap ‘facebook’ with ‘google’ 🙂
Cheers,
Dave
Hi David, I actually don’t disagree with you. Google does have its prominent place in the tech news cycle, but Facebook has just taken over. When Google has an announcement or a news piece written about them, the interest in those stories in about half compared to interest in Facebook stories. This is probably because almost everyone is on FB and have an opinion about the user experience. To me, it seems that FB is controlling the spin. The only real negatives after the F8 conference were from pissed off users. (Though now we’re starting to see a few journalists questioning the potential of a world dominated by Facebook – notice I said ‘potential’.) And if Google+ ever became the only gatekeeper on the internet, I would write a similar negative piece about them.
Internet bubbles which grow at the rate the Facebook fad is growing inevitably burst. It’s happened before and it’ll happen again once people start to wake up and think rationally about what they’re doing. I agree with Jill.
Everything runs its course and is eventually overtaken by something bigger and greater than before. Facebook is no different.
Facebook is out of control and does need reigning in, I agree with much of what you say Jill, the recent Spotify intergration that means all new Spotify users must have a Facebook account to use the service is an extremely bad step.
Why on earth should someone who wants to listen to music via Spotify, need a Facebook account? I can see the sense in Spotify wanting to offer their service to Facebook users, but I cannot see the sense in making Facebook a requirement for new Spotify users.
@Jill Kennedy; As always, great fucking drawing/graph, that just made me laugh so hard i cried..You’re such a fantastic human being Jill …
MOTHERFUCKER JONES
(but Dont Call Me by my Disney Ass Name Jill…)
Thanks Motherfucker Jones – one of the most awesome-est posts ever. You have a Disney Ass Name?
I don’t normally posts on comments, but that graph is just too funny.
I can understand the dog and cat people on the site, because i have a few of those on AutumnsList too.
I also don’t like to talk bad about others, but watching how a lot of websites operate with a huge lack of disrespect for there users is, well, disgusting!
I just read that fb wants to do away with the LAW that limits the collection of data on kids 13 and under!
This hit home with me because i have older teens and younger ones. What type of business thinks this way? Even google with it’s many privacy issues has never gone this far. I bet if Zuckerberg had kids he wouldn’t be thinking this way.
I guess you could say my website is sorta in competition with fb, although I don’t really consider it that way. We are more of the opposite when it comes to the business model.
I too was getting tired of social websites I had joined, not just fb, and all their privacy issues.
I couldn’t figure out why they wouldn’t just make it like we would want it, then I realised that it was all about the money.
I remember when fb started. It was simple, it was interesting, then change after change came and a lot of us lost interest in checking our privacy settings over and over again, or relearning how to use a website we have been on for years.
Anyway, I realised that they would never change their business model as you call it and went off looking for something better (I like my privacy). It seemed like everyone was trying to be like them, even the privacy policies looked the same. It was the I want to be like Mike thing all over again!
If your a company reading this, please do your own thing. Stand up to the fad and don’t tie in to closely, because if fb goes down it will take you down too. I know it sounds crazy, but other than a “share this” plugin on my site, I don’t have any affiliation with anyone with a privacy policy that doesn’t share our views.
And I didn’t build my site to compete with anyone, here is a quick bio of how it happened:
I really didn’t build my site for everyone at first, it was more like a hobby and it was mainly for my family to keep in touch.
Any how some friends wanted in and so on, so eventually I just went ahead and made it a public site for anyone to join. After that I added a classified section, forums, groups, events, etc, etc.
So if anyone would like to come over and kick the tires that would be great, and it’s free too. please read our privacy policy located at the bottom of the page to see the difference of where we stand.
I don’t know if I can raise enough funds to make it faster, but for now I guess it will have to do, hopefully I won’t get a huge rush of people in one day, not sure if the servers can handle that yet.
In closing I just wanted to say if privacy is a concern then we have the solution. I believe you don’t have to give up your rights for privacy just to socialise, that’s just wrong.
Sorry I got carried away, sometimes I just get wrapped up in the moment.
“Facebook needs to realize that the only reason they are popular is because we all have this urge to see what our friends from high school and college look like now. That’s it really. It’s not to watch “The Dark Knight” for 30 Facebook Credits or buy pigs on “Farmville” (millions do it, I know, and why not? – it’s right there in front of us and we’re freakin’ bored with our lives).”
Wow. You have absolutely no business discussing social media as it is painfully clear that you simply do not have a clue.
And so what if FB is set to have more pages than there are people in the world? Bid deal. Back in 2008 Google announced that there was “1 trillion (as in 1,000,000,000,000) unique URLs on the web at once.”
The entire purpose behind behavioral targeting is to provide users with quicker access to the information they need then and now. Your little analogy comparing your mom’s FB status update to Glengarry Glen Ross is childish in the extreme.
First off, behavioral target as done by FB is in no way as invasive or are you arguing that they now send people to your home to pitch you? Second, while the advertiser may know that their ads are being delivered to an active audience they don’t know who that person is. Your privacy is still well maintained.
This part really confused me.
“They don’t realize that if my mom said to one of her friends on Facebook – “We’re thinking of selling our house” – and then suddenly ads appear next to her profile and emails are sent to her Inbox from brokers attempting to get her business – that there is a connection.”
What emails? There is currently no advertising product offered by FB that provides advertisers with the email address of people who post status updates which might tenuously identify said user as a potential customer. In fact, FB’s own Advertising Guidelines clearly states “User data received or derived from Facebook, including information collected from an ad or derived from targeting criteria, may not be used off of Facebook without users’ prior express consent” so it’s quite clear that your “they get email spam from a status update” claim is pure bullshit.
I know this will make me FB toll #13 (?) but in all honesty I don’t really give a rats ass. There is so much rampant ignorance on this blog that I just had to try and combat the flames of stupidity.
Great points, JBoston. You’ve done it again. Now get to work on TechCrunch – there is lots of ignorance there. In fact, I was thinking of calling this blog “Rampant Ignorance” – but decided against it at the last minute. Dude – you have a hell of a job. How the F are you going to post on all the negative stories about Facebook. There will be 1 trillion Facebook accounts and probably a few billion negative stories about Facebook between now and your IPO. My next blog will be entitled: “Facebook’s Biggest Problem? Too Much Time Between Now And The IPO” – which is so true. Too many personalities and too many opportunities to F it up. The redesign is a disaster and an army of PR people are trying to fix the problem through defensive posts on blogs. You should try to help out Groupon first – they really need the help – then get to FB. Perhaps it was wise to delay the IPO until late 2012. I just hope you do your job well. If not, you may be reassigned to the data center on the Arctic Circle.
The only reason i’m on facebook is friends who are on facebook if they were on myspace or other place then i would be there.
They can stalk your profile and information for their advantage. They recently disabled my profile and no explanation for it was provided beside automated answers.. even after sending my id they didn’t sent me back single mail. They are pretty much like dictators.
Well – sorry FB fans – I agree with Jill. Facebook is a horrid shaggy shoggoth – and one I do not participate in. I have no need to.
If someone I know needs to contact me – they have my phone number or email address. Those work just fine, last time I checked.
I have no desire whatsoever to see pics of anyone’s stunning backyard view, or their Aunt Milly’s bunions, or the oh-so-cute way their cats sleep next to each other. I don’t need to be “poked” or “updated” on anybody’s relationship status. I don’t need to lose myself in a wash of moronic apps or sub-par free Zynga games. If I want to play a game, I’ll play Dragon Age or Mass Effect, thanks.
If you are not paying for a product, then you are not a customer – you are the thing being sold. And Facebook is selling you – and all the info you put on their pages – to all the marketers in bed with them. Period.
Aside from all of that – it’s really just a COLOSSAL waste of time. And over essentially nothing. So thanks to Jill – once again – for pointing out what should be painfully obvious to everyone already, but sadly isn’t.
Cheers!