Amazon is one of many companies that pay Facebook to generate these automated ads when a user clicks to “like” their brands or references them in some other way. Facebook users agree to participate in the ads halfway through the site’s 4,000-word terms of service, which they consent to when they sign up.
Not feeling all too great about Facebook these days, especially after this poor guy’s update about personal lubricant turned into a Facebook ad.
Prior to this whole incident, many people were likely unaware that their status updates could be used in this way. But it’s a huge warning sign (as if we really needed another) to watch what you share on the social network.
Of course, there will be users who will miss this story altogether. So don’t expect these types of embarrassing moments to stop anytime soon.
I’ve tried to tweet “Get Better.” (without the quotes) a dozen times now, and it keeps not showing. A friend of mine told me that, while in high school, Jack Dorsey’s (the creator of Twitter) father used to spur him to work harder with that exact sentence.
If true, this would make for an awesome chapter in Jack Dorsey’s life story.
EDIT: So after a few crafty people tweeted it successfully with additional text, it looks like “Get Better.” can’t be tweeted only if tweeted alone.
Facebook is a company of technologists, not marketers. If you wanted to bet on someone succeeding in the marketing business, you’d bet on technologists only if they could invent some new way to sell; you wouldn’t bet on them to sell the way marketers have always sold.
But that’s what Facebook is doing, selling individual ads. From a revenue perspective, it’s an ad-sales business, not a technology company. To meet expectations—the expectations that took it public at $100 billion, the ever-more-vigilant expectations needed to sustain it at that price—it has to sell at near hyperspeed.
A whole lot of companies.
Of all places that this feature could be found, the last place I would think of would be the New York Times. Alas, it’s a fun 15-second time suck that does provide some context to Facebook’s value.
Kanye West and Jay-Z fans, rejoice.
CrayBook is a Chrome Extension that turns the “Like” button on Facebook into a “Dat Shit Cray” button. If liking on Facebook wasn’t already cool enough, this plugin will certainly revolutionize your experience on the recently-IPOed social network. It was created by the GoPollGo team.
Now if you’ll pardon me, I’m going to go get in my zone.
It’s not supposed to compete with Facebook, but even declaring itself out of the social network race won’t stop So.cl from a fail of a launch.
When “video parties” are the standout feature and you “experiment” with search by making searches public, it can’t bode well for fast user adoption, much less user interest.
And even worse: So.cl has been live for months, according to Tom Warren. Yet another mediocre social network — and while it may have a chance — the initial buzz does not seem positive.
Big discussion yesterday over Facebook’s traffic faucet and the sudden decline in monthly actives for social reader apps.
No, Facebook news reader apps aren’t declining because users suddenly got fed up with auto-sharing. The user loss is likely due to the transition to “trending articles”, a new way of surfacing recently read articles in the news feed that Facebook is testing.
It’s a valid point — users don’t just flee all at once, as the Washington Post Social Reader AppData graph may have shown.
But in a way, it’s possible the user loss can be tied to negative user sentiment. Facebook wouldn’t change the News Feed if the social reader apps were actually interesting and/or driving interaction. Perhaps Facebook saw a trend that most users viewed these as too noisy or too spammy for their feeds, then implemented a News Feed change.
Either way, it’s bad news for any company looking to build a product that relies upon Facebook interactions. It’s a (harsh?) reminder that Facebook is in full control of what gets into the News Feed, so entrepreneurs building social applications should be warned.
Arrington nails a key issue that has a lot of users ho-hum on Facebook. Over time, Facebook has become less and less relevant for users due to outdated, unfocused friend lists.
Let’s be honest: It’s a major pain in the ass to click to every profile of people you dislike or don’t care about to unfriend them. I ran into this problem in late October last year when I decided to unsubscribe from most people who I rarely talked to anymore.
Most users won’t take the time to clean up their social graph. Joining a new social network and starting fresh is an easy, no-hassle route. That’s why Path has taken off like it has, and there are still room for other competitors in this new close-knit social network space.
Facebook has to provide their users with a way to quickly unsubscribe or unfriend from former connections that they do not want to listen to anymore. It would be in Facebook’s best interest to provide this, as a tighter-focused and more relevant social graph would likely lead to more interaction and more engagement on the site.
New research from Nielsen shows that the No. 1 reason people remove others from their friend lists is something they said — or posted. Offensive comments were listed as the top reason for friend removals, with 55 percent of people in the study saying it was the primary motivator for cutting names off their friend list.
A new study and infographic from NM Incite shows us the specific reasons behind why we add and remove Facebook friends. It’s not groundbreaking nor is it a massive sample size, but it is interesting to see the various reasons why people change up their social graph.
Facebook’s “Subscribe” functionality has changed the add/remove process a bit, though, so I’m not sure how much stock we can put into these responses. For instance, I may unsubscribe from someone but not de-friend them. Upon implementation, it changed the way people shaped, added and removed from their social graph. Going off of de-friending alone may not be a full representation of who’s listening to who on the social network.
On Facebook Messages
Facebook messages are convenient and easy to use, but they are no substitute for email.
I’ve found that while I check my Facebook messages almost daily, there are times when some messages go unanswered for several days, even weeks. Perhaps it’s just the way I use the messaging system, but it’s hard to miss me if you write an email instead.
Likewise, when I send out a Facebook message, I don’t expect an immediate response, or even a response at all. It seems to be a hit-or-miss thing, a roll of the dice.
My inbox may now hate me for this post.