I’m Angry At Facebook
Ericka Andersen

I agree that any business strategic shift can be sadly surprising to the clients, but that what business is allowed, or even often, forced to do in the first place. Facebook was a nice social interaction tool in the colleges where it started; it is now just a scheme to monetize all (!) member on-line interactions they can get away with. In other words, Facebook is not interested in creating a free marketing & media distribution channel tool for all Earth’s businesses to reach over a billion of people and absorb the infrastructure cost of it only because they are nice. Three issues, however, I wonder about:

1) Is charging for distributing business content to its Friends applicable to non-profits and charity organizations. If so, then Facebook is unapologetically charging good people for i.e. mobilizing Facebook members to feed hungry people.

2) If Facebook is monetizing any feasible one-to-many internal channel (such as holding hostage business entity’s messages to its Friends unless they pay to release them), it is still is not capable of monetizing a setup where a business entity creates a Facebook app allowing Friend to be added to an external DB and receive whatever they wish, through an external companion app or channel, directly to their devices.

3) The impact of all that on the business website incoming traffic from Facebook is undeniable but it what social-net marketing managers charge for already (as full time empoyees or outsourced specialists) expecting that Facebook “doesn’t do to others what we do to you” is excessive. Maybe it is just wise to stop treating Facebook-to-website traffic as a commodity.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.