The evolution of Facebook from a Conversational to a ‘Social’ platform

Posted by Bhavishya Kanjhan on Oct 29, 2010 in Default | 2 comments

The Social Network finally released in theaters in Dubai yesterday and Team Clique in association with anayou held a viewing of it for a few of our agency friends. Watching the journey of the growth of the Facebook reminded me of how I came to know of it. I was first told of it by a few friends who were studying in the USA and I remember being envious; it did sound cool.  I signed up to be notified when it became available to my university and I remember being extremely excited when it finally did open up to my network (Birmingham, UK). My facebook ID tells me I was user #6 to register on my network, my best friend was #9. It opened up to my university during the  examination period and it still took less than 2 weeks to hit critical mass. The excitement lasted for quite some time.

Of course Facebook has evolved a great deal since then. The biggest thing that excited us, and what the original idea was based upon – exclusivity, has since gone. I remembering being disappointed when it opened up to schools and later everyone but accepted it as part of the site’s growth. But it’s not just that; the way I, and many of friends too, use Facebook has changed considerably. We no longer write on walls all day or have a long list of unreturned pokes.My facebook inbox is contains updates from the groups I have joined, similarly my news feed contains as many posts from pages I have liked as it contain updates from games my friends are playing or quizzes they are taking. The photos stream often contains my friends tagged in images that are contests or in one of those ‘Tag your friend who is grumpy/happy/ etc’ images; in short, pictures that aren’t them.

While I still check Facebook multiple times a day, I just browse through rather than interact with my friends. This may be because I’m bored of it, or maybe because my friends are boring, or maybe because I may have outgrown the games/quizzes (I do take a few but not nearly as many as there are on my stream), or maybe, just maybe that the Facebook platform has evolved dramatically. It has evolved from something what was once a conversational platform into one that is merely social; when I say social, I mean involving in and sharing with our connections what we’re doing, but not engaging and interacting with them. Or maybe as I am – as with a lot of other things – simply nostalgic and yearn for the ‘good old days’

I’m curious to know your thoughts on this. Have your Facebook habits changed in the last few years?

Yet another post on Twitter: Fad v/s Revolution

Posted by Bhavishya Kanjhan on Jul 23, 2009 in Default | 2 comments

You don’t need to look far to find critics of Twitter. There’s as many opponents of the service as there are proponents. The former argue that Twitter is just a ‘fad’. An April 2009 report by Nielsen online says that Twitter has a retention rate of less than 40%, which means more than 60% of the users who sign up and try the service do not become regular users of it. So it may be. But the debate on whether Twitter is a ‘Revolution’ or not will last for some more time.

Let’s change tracks and look at something that was a revolution, Napster, which I doubt I need to give you the history of. Napster brought a revolution in the music industry, changing forever the way people acquired and consumed music. While Napster (in its original form) may now be defunct, the spirit behind is still alive, in the various copycat software that followed it, in the technology that was – in part – inspired by it (Bittorrent) , but most importantly in the attitude and behaviour of the people today. A report by Morgan Stanley’s, now hotshot, teen intern says teens are “very reluctant” to pay for music and spend more time streaming it off websites. But the more important change was in the way we acquire music. Music purchased these days is now accessible everywhere on and on each of the multiple devices a user owns. Unlike in the past where a buyer would pay full price for a crappy album with one acceptable track, he can now choose to purchase just that one track and he now has a playlist full of hits. iTunes is the biggest music store in the world today, having beat all other brick and mortar music stores, distributing DRM free music in a similar manner to what Napster did; digitally.

The point I’m desperately trying to make is it doesn’t matter if Twitter, or for that matter any of the other popular Social Networking Sites, die out in a few years. The web has seen its social meter rise through the years – first with forums, then reviews, ratings, wiki, social websites etc – and will certainly continue on that trend. The people (and businesses) that are social today, will continue to be social then. Brands that did not directly engage their consumers till yesterday, are doing so today and will do so tomorrow. Companies that didn’t see social websites as a source of revenue/lead generation till yesterday, are doing so today and will do so tomorrow. Researchers who did not see the social interaction as a source of first hand knowledge till yesterday, are doing so today and will do so tomorrow. The one to one and one to many channels of communication that we’ll now be used will become an important element of an individual/businesses’ communication strategy.

All the activities I mentioned above will continue even in the absence of Twitter, albeit on a newer and more evolved platform. After all, Facebook and Twitter are also evolutionary products of others (and themselves) before them. So maybe it’s okay if Twitter isn’t a revolution because it’s evolution into the product it is today has brought to center the importance of the Social element of the web which will persist when/if Twitter is superseded by something newer.

Image Credit : Tegan

Tags: evolution, facebook, revolution, social networks, twitter
Read More