It’s an intern weekend here at AH. Julianne Rowe shares why she doesn’t think Facebook is going anywhere fast.
We all remember Myspace. It got big just as quickly as it faded away. If Myspace was just a fad, does that mean Facebook is too? I don’t think so. Facebook is here to stay, at least for a while.
Since its creation in February of 2004, Facebook has constantly expanded. Starting as a networking site for Harvard students, the site rapidly grew and is currently used by people all over the world. Now, marketers say, “it’s a Facebook world and other social networks just live in it.” Facebook is the most popular social networking site worldwide and continues to grow at a steady rate with more than 600 million active users as of January of 2011.
According to the world map of social media, Facebook has turned almost the entire world blue, with more people connecting everyday. Why is Facebook succeeding while so many other social networking sites have failed? Why MySpace’s Failure Solidifies Facebook’s Future tells us the five reasons why.
#1 Sharing – The point of Facebook is to share. The site provides its users a great platform to share everything from photos, to links and personal life updates.
#2 Simplicity – Facebook attracts users of all ages, using a platform that is easy to understand and navigate.
#3 Subtlety – Without users knowing it, facebook has become a leading site for advertisers. By using basic information like age, location and interests, facebook is able to target ads directly relatable to different audiences. Plus, the share button makes it easy for users to share their favorite ads with friends.
#4 Usefulness – Ever wonder what your old friends from high school or college are up to now? Facebook provides a great platform to find them and reconnect. You can even connect with family that lives across the world without the cost of international phone fees.
#5 Necessity – Facebook is doing everything it can to be the fad that won’t fade. With a recently introduced new email service, Facebook is constantly recreating itself to ensure that its users are getting a new experience all the time.
Despite the attempts of many Middle Eastern countries to ban the site, Facebook has prevailed as the social networking leader in 119 out of 134 countries. Although a drop in traffic has been reported in North America, most likely due to expanding popularity for Twitter and LinkedIn, the site is still growing rapidly all over the world.
What does it mean for one social networking site to rule the world? Does Facebook have too much power? Or does the convenience of one social networking site outweigh the competitive benefits of a more diverse internet? Think about it; never before have we been able to have such instant communication. With Facebook, we’re one click away from interacting with almost anyone in the world.
You raise some really interesting questions and points Julianne. To me, FB’s success from a product standpoint is its simplicity and clean interface. MySpace and Friendster compel users to spend more time in their own section, crafting their profile, while Facebook (at least, since the introduction of the newsfeed) compels users to interact immediately. It’s “customization” comes through sharing media and participating in games and surveys and likes and fans, all very social activities. On your closing question as to the benefit of a monopoly platform—it’s so hard to answer. No one likes one solution to something, but at the same time, it’s pointless to go to a social networking site where you are the only one there. It will be very interesting to see how this all plays out. @ryoatcision
Good points Ryo! It’s interesting to think how adverse we are to “one solution to something.” Must play into the ADD generation…I’m very excited to see the next ten years for Facebook and other social networking sites. Thanks for checking out Marketing Conversation!
You raise some really interesting questions and points Julianne. To me, FB’s success from a product standpoint is its simplicity and clean interface. MySpace and Friendster compel users to spend more time in their own section, crafting their profile, while Facebook (at least, since the introduction of the newsfeed) compels users to interact immediately. It’s “customization” comes through sharing media and participating in games and surveys and likes and fans, all very social activities. On your closing question as to the benefit of a monopoly platform—it’s so hard to answer. No one likes one solution to something, but at the same time, it’s pointless to go to a social networking site where you are the only one there. It will be very interesting to see how this all plays out. @ryoatcision
Good points Ryo! It’s interesting to think how adverse we are to “one solution to something.” Must play into the ADD generation…I’m very excited to see the next ten years for Facebook and other social networking sites. Thanks for checking out Marketing Conversation!
Pingback: Facebook: Taking Over Social Networking « Julianne Rowe
Pingback: Facebook: Taking Over Social Networking « Julianne Rowe