Snapchat Is a Better Psychological User Experience Than Facebook
Unlike disappearing “snapchats” sent to selected friends, pictures uploaded on Facebook and Instagram are on Timelines everyone can see at any time. You can send pictures on Messenger to specific people and upload videos temporarily on Instagram. But this it not the main user experience. It’s not as highly prioritized by the design.
Any Friend can Comment or React to pictures on Facebook and Instagram at any time. All your other Friends can see those Comments or Reactions as well. This makes sense at first, to fill the News Feed with updates. But it makes users exposed and vulnerable uploading content. As a result users don’t upload content as much on Facebook or Instagram than Snapchat. On Snapchat, not only does a shared picture expire in 24 hours, you’re encouraged to chose specific friends to share it with. Any comments made are only seen by you.
You can share pictures to specific Friends on Facebook, but they don’t expire and disappear unless you delete them, which adds exposure and vulnerability. The default permanence gives weight to the act of sharing pictures. Sharing pictures with specific Friends is not as prioritized in the user experience as uploading content for the world to see on the News Feed homepage.
Since our number of Facebook and Instagram Friends is publicly visible, we want to Friend as many people as possible to seem socially valued and with many Friends in the real world. Many see pictures uploaded on Facebook and Instagram, not just close friends who know us well and understand the context of what we post. This also makes us exposed and vulnerable. People — not your close Friends — leave hurtful Comments and Reactions seen by others, lowering your social value. We avoid this, not uploading content as often and not uploading authentic content. Less content on Facebook and Instagram means we check and use it less.
Inauthentic content means rather than real lives and weaknesses, we see best superficial, material selves. Close friends see strengths in our weaknesses, but many Friends on Facebook and Instagram don’t have that context, so we don’t share weaknesses and instead materialistic content. As a result, looking through the News Feed is harmful. We compare isolated selves — brought to the phone in times of loneliness —with others’ glorified, romanticized, material and unhuman lives glowing before us. We feel on a lower pedestal after.
On Facebook and Instagram, content isn’t uploaded often and isn’t authentic. But the exposure and vulnerability bring people back to monitor their profile, which is good for Facebook and Instagram. And the harmful peer comparison makes people weaker and more vulnerable to ads, which is good for Facebook and Instagram.
On Snapchat, people are urged to share quickly disappearing content with fewer people. The private sharing, and the quick disappearance, make you less vulnerable and easier to be authentic. Seeing realistic footage from friends’ lives may make you feel better and less vulnerable to ads, and is better for Snapchat’s long term. The authenticity which makes people comfortable sharing their weaknesses and not romanticizing themselves may give better metadata about people and what they want in advertisements.
Further, Facebook and Instagram have been tied to lower life satisfaction. You look at others on extremely high pedestals in response to exposure and vulnerability. Snapchat may not have this problem, as people don’t have to put themselves on such pedestals. People will price it into their engagement with Facebook and Instagram and use Snapchat more.
On Snapchat, pictures and videos can be public in Stories. But even those are less exposed than Facebook and Instagram. They’re gone after 24 hours. People can’t leave Comments or Reactions others can see. While Stories are more exposing than content shared with specific people, they’re not as bad as permanent uploads on Facebook and Instagram. In the short term, people feel better about themselves and less need to buy things in ads. This lowers ad cost and revenue. But in the long term, revenue will increase as time goes on and we become aware and shift use to services with value.
Snapchat is more intimate and better. You don’t need materialistic armor to protect the inner self. It can come out protected by transience and private Comments and Reactions.
Momentary, intimate sharing with specific people or groups, and private interaction with that content bring less vulnerability and more confidence sharing real content knowing your inner self can only be so invalidated with others.
Facebook and Instagram should take after Snapchat. Snapchat’s design creates less vulnerability, letting more authentic content be shared, letting people better real relationships with one another.
Rather than upload authentic content showing vulnerabilities loved by our few meaningful relationships, on Facebook and Instagram we upload materialistic content easily Liked by many. Anything more is more specific to certain people, our close relationships. It’s not culturally appropriate to upload authentic content showing vulnerabilities and inner selves, like a weird sense of humor. Since content is shared with everyone, we may seem to lack meaningful relationships we’d otherwise share our inner selves privately with. Materialistic content fits the culture created by the design of Facebook and Instagram focused on mass exposure and permanence.
More transience and intimacy means more authenticity. Momentary transience and private sharing and interacting should stay prioritized in the Snapchat’s design and be considered by Facebook.
With Snapchat, less exposure and vulnerability leads to more authentic content and use. More pictures seen means more ads. As more pictures and videos are shared, more metadata makes ads more targeted. Authentic, accurate metadata improves it further. On Snapchat, each ad unit can cost more from better audience targeting and more ads sold and revenue made.
