Thread: Are Social Sites Really the Wave of the Future?

Is Social Really the Wave of the Future? I wonder if sites like MySpace and Facebook are like the CB (Citizen Band Radio) fad of the 1970s. There doesn't seem to be much to do on Facebook but to chat, flirt and post photos. The traffic is there; so, it pays for businesses to advertise there.

However, this makes me wonder:

"News Corp has sold social media site Myspace for about $35 million to online advertising company Specific Media, according to a source familiar with the transaction.

The deal, announced on Wednesday, calls for News Corp to retain a minority stake in the website that it purchased six years ago for $580 million, the companies said."

News Corp sells Myspace, ending six-year saga - Yahoo! News

I am thinking that most businesses on facebook really do not make that much, if any, money.
To get people to like them, follow them, etc. they have to constantly give away stuff.

Now for normal people.
You are right, it is just to visit with people.
Nothing else.

Myself and my wife, I don't think we have ever clicked on any ad ever shown to us.
And the same goes for our family and friends.

It will die out...just give it time.

This is interesting:

Justin Timberlake part of group buying MySpace

Timberlake will have an office at MySpace's Beverly Hills headquarters and a staff of about a half dozen people working for him "around the clock" developing his ideas for the site, said Specific Media CEO Tim Vanderhook.

Justin Timberlake part of group buying MySpace - Yahoo! Finance

Originally Posted by iowadawg

I am thinking that most businesses on facebook really do not make that much, if any, money.
To get people to like them, follow them, etc. they have to constantly give away stuff.

Now for normal people.
You are right, it is just to visit with people.
Nothing else.

Myself and my wife, I don't think we have ever clicked on any ad ever shown to us.
And the same goes for our family and friends.

I guess that is why FaceBook is so aggressive with using members data to target ads.

Originally Posted by iowadawg

It will die out...just give it time.

I don't believe that will happen until something better comes along.

The California chat lines and online chat rooms eventually killed the CB radio. Cellphones replaced the beeper. Eventually, something better will come along.

What really killed the cb radio was not chat lines, but the first car phones that became cheaper for people.
Cellphones just an upgrade from the first car phones.

Facebook will die off, even if nothing better comes along.
Because kids today are on cellphones, texting away.
So much easier than going on facebook.

Then the ipads and others like it make it easier and easier for people to direct connect without needing a site like facebook.

I see social networking as part of a logical evolution of the internet. Facebook itself may be a "fad", but social networking is here to stay, simply because it draws from a fundamental aspect of human nature as social beings.

As internet penetrates deeper and deeper into the fabric of society, it only makes sense that these basic aspects of human life get online as well, and social networking is just a consolidation of that effort.

I think SMS is more likely to fade away than social networking. All it takes is to get all phones online for a lower price than it takes to send all those text messages, and integrate social networking messaging applications into all of them. Before you know it SMS will seem ancient and clunky compared to something like Facebook Messages or Google+ Messages.

I could say a lot more about what all of this leads to, but I might have to save it for an article. There's also the internet of things, and social networking may evolve into semi-telepathy....

Originally Posted by iowadawg

What really killed the cb radio was not chat lines, but the first car phones that became cheaper for people.
Cellphones just an upgrade from the first car phones.

Cellphone texting and AOL were the double whammy on the CD fad.

Cellphones by themselves aren't 'social' in the same way.

It became very common for various towns to 'adopt' one of the "interstation" channels as their 'home' channel. This accomplised two things: first, this help prevent overcrowding on Ch 11, and second; this allowed a CB'er to go to that town's 'home channel' to try and contact another CB'er from that town, instead of a general 'call' on Ch 11.

Citizens' band radio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by memenode

I see social networking as part of a logical evolution of the internet.

Originally Posted by memenode

Facebook itself may be a "fad", but social networking is here to stay, simply because it draws from a fundamental aspect of human nature as social beings.

Social is important and the plaform evolving according to the product life cycle. As you said, Social is a human need.

Originally Posted by memenode

As internet penetrates deeper and deeper into the fabric of society, it only makes sense that these basic aspects of human life get online as well, and social networking is just a consolidation of that effort.

Originally Posted by memenode

I think SMS is more likely to fade away than social networking. All it takes is to get all phones online for a lower price than it takes to send all those text messages, and integrate social networking messaging applications into all of them. Before you know it SMS will seem ancient and clunky compared to something like Facebook Messages or Google+ Messages.

Originally Posted by iowadawg

What really killed the cb radio was not chat lines, but the first car phones that became cheaper for people.
Cellphones just an upgrade from the first car phones.

Cellphone texting and AOL were the double whammy on the CD fad.

Cellphones by themselves aren't 'social' in the same way.

It became very common for various towns to 'adopt' one of the "interstation" channels as their 'home' channel. This accomplised two things: first, this help prevent overcrowding on Ch 11, and second; this allowed a CB'er to go to that town's 'home channel' to try and contact another CB'er from that town, instead of a general 'call' on Ch 11.

Citizens' band radio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by memenode

I see social networking as part of a logical evolution of the internet.

Originally Posted by memenode

Facebook itself may be a "fad", but social networking is here to stay, simply because it draws from a fundamental aspect of human nature as social beings.

Social is important and the plaform evolving according to the product life cycle. As you said, Social is a human need.

Originally Posted by memenode

As internet penetrates deeper and deeper into the fabric of society, it only makes sense that these basic aspects of human life get online as well, and social networking is just a consolidation of that effort.

Originally Posted by memenode

I think SMS is more likely to fade away than social networking. All it takes is to get all phones online for a lower price than it takes to send all those text messages, and integrate social networking messaging applications into all of them. Before you know it SMS will seem ancient and clunky compared to something like Facebook Messages or Google+ Messages.

Social Networking is a great medium for communication and sharing information - photos, messages and more.

But is Social the best way to index, organize and seach the web. The internet's original purpose is to share information which seems to me a "social bubble" is contary to the information age.

It also seems that the hidden web is getting bigger as search goes social.

Originally Posted by bogart

But is Social the best way to index, organize and seach the web.

I would guess a hybrid of some sort might be the best way to go. If you take all value signals into account social must be in there somewhere. In a sense, even link building is a "social" activity.

Originally Posted by bogart

The internet's original purpose is to share information which seems to me a "social bubble" is contary to the information age.

It also seems that the hidden web is getting bigger as search goes social.

The problem is information overload, and filtering is an inevitable solution to that. Even if you leave all filtering mechanisms out people would still have to do some filtering for themselves due to the simple fact that they can't absorb all information that is out there, or even all information that gets to them. Some of it may be irrelevant to their needs and interests, and others might just be redundant. That means that whatever we do we'll end up in some kinds of personal bubbles. The question is only how will this filtering be done, and by which methods would these "bubbles" be built. There are probably better and worse ways of doing it, but it does have to be done.

I think its here to stay but will just evolve into something that offers its users video or voice chat as well as just type.

The CB radio fad actually died twice. It was very popular in the late 1960s and died in the mid 1970s. That was long before cell phones and texting. At that point it was not replaced or pushed out by anything. It just died out naturally like most fads. It then came back later in the 1990s. The second round only lasted a few years. It appears that cellphones did have an impact on CB radio for the second round because both are primarily mobile communications. The truckers are probably very pleased that most citizens abandoned CB radio because it has been traditionally used by truckers as a primary means of communication.

I'm a little bit older than most people here. Most people in my age group have trouble fathoming how social media has survived this long. I have a presentation that I give to groups of business executives regarding how to best utilize social media for business. I can say that without a doubt at least 95% of people over 50 have a very difficult time grasping the social media concept. Their concept of communications is quite different.

Here is why social media as we know it today is likely to fade out.

1. The concept itself is very weak as are the communication methods. You have to go to the social media site to monitor the communications. Most communications are public or semi-public, so it is more like a bulletin board that has been repackaged to focus on a group of "friends," most of which you do not know and will never meet.

2. There isn't any clear way to generate revenue other than through advertising. That could all be wiped out in a heartbeat if a better promotional method comes along. As large as You Tube is, it has been operating at a loss since it started due to bandwidth costs. It might turn a small profit this year for the first time due to advertising sales.

3. The business model for social media is very close to the failed dot com investment model of the late 1990s where the goal was not to generate money through the business, but rather to make money when the company is sold or goes public. A Company's "value" was based upon hype. I remember dot com companies in the 1990s who gathered operating funds from venture capitalists and then joked about their "burn rate", which meant how fast they were spending investment money without generating any return.

4. Social media companies do not accrue any real asset value. If the company goes out of business, there isn't anything of value left other than a few office fixtures and perhaps some PCs and web servers. There isn't any product or inventory or anything of real value. Like the dot coms, the value of a social media company is based upon hype.

5. From the perspective of people who know how to make money with a traditional business model, most social media appears to be an incredible waste of time. It has also very likely diminished productivity for companies who allow their employees to freely engage in social media while on the job. You might as well allow them to stand around the water cooler chatting all day.

Yes, social media as we know it today will eventually fade away. Is it a fad? Perhaps. That depends upon whether or not it survives. I see it as evolving. My Space was the best thing for a while and now is rapidly fading. People will eventually tire of Twitter, FaceBook and move to newer technologies and concepts.

Originally Posted by TopDogger

1. The concept itself is very weak as are the communication methods. You have to go to the social media site to monitor the communications. Most communications are public or semi-public, so it is more like a bulletin board that has been repackaged to focus on a group of "friends," most of which you do not know and will never meet.

I don't see why going to a social media site makes it a weak concept. It's no worse than having to pick up the phone and dial a number, or choose a contact on a smartphone.

As for public and semi-public communications, that's actually just the expanded form of communication that's added on to the typical private communication. It doesn't really take anything away from the original concept of communication. Furthermore, how public it is, and what exactly is shared depends from person to person. Overall, it just seems like communication on steroids, combined with a few other things.

Originally Posted by TopDogger

2. There isn't any clear way to generate revenue other than through advertising. That could all be wiped out in a heartbeat if a better promotional method comes along. As large as You Tube is, it has been operating at a loss since it started due to bandwidth costs. It might turn a small profit this year for the first time due to advertising sales.

3. The business model for social media is very close to the failed dot com investment model of the late 1990s where the goal was not to generate money through the business, but rather to make money when the company is sold or goes public. A Company's "value" was based upon hype. I remember dot com companies in the 1990s who gathered operating funds from venture capitalists and then joked about their "burn rate", which meant how fast they were spending investment money without generating any return.

At best, this just means bad news for proprietary operators of social media such as Facebook and Google. It could be said that Email too isn't profitable enough, but that didn't stop it from being one of the fundamental means of online communication. If there is a need for something, but it happens the business model around it is awkward, what I see happening is gradual decentralization. It evolves into a new standard with many hosts connected together all of which can sustain themselves individually, therefore sustaining the entire network.

That said, leverage that social media can provide its operators probably shouldn't be underestimated. I doubt Google is really "stupid" for betting just about their entire company on Google+. Why would they do this if there wasn't some kind of a business argument to be made of it? Using social media signals to improve "organizing information" is possibly just the most obvious example of how can social media serve as leverage for a related business (such as search).

Originally Posted by TopDogger

4. Social media companies do not accrue any real asset value. If the company goes out of business, there isn't anything of value left other than a few office fixtures and perhaps some PCs and web servers. There isn't any product or inventory or anything of real value. Like the dot coms, the value of a social media company is based upon hype.

Isn't that true for just about any online business, except perhaps for e-commerce with their own stock inventory?

Originally Posted by TopDogger

5. From the perspective of people who know how to make money with a traditional business model, most social media appears to be an incredible waste of time. It has also very likely diminished productivity for companies who allow their employees to freely engage in social media while on the job. You might as well allow them to stand around the water cooler chatting all day.

Well, yeah, if they don't have any particular goal to their chatting (that is, their social strategy sucks) then yes.

Originally Posted by TopDogger

Yes, social media as we know it today will eventually fade away. Is it a fad? Perhaps. That depends upon whether or not it survives. I see it as evolving. My Space was the best thing for a while and now is rapidly fading. People will eventually tire of Twitter, FaceBook and move to newer technologies and concepts.

That's what I think. The general concept of social media is valid in my opinion, but there can be varying implementations of it, some better and some worse. Facebook was a huge improvement from MySpace, and that's why it's where it is. Google+ might push things further, and then someone else might come along and do this all over again, but the general idea would still be here. The way I see it the general concept is simply a result of taking "socializing" and all of its effects from the offline world to the online world. One is an extension of the other, and to some extent as we become more "transhumanist" if you will, one will somewhat replace the other due to the limitations of a non-digital "offline" world. It's just an ongoing transformation of human society through the new possibilities offered by technology.