Tragedy & Comedy
Mark Zuckerberg’s initial vision for Facebook was to help people connect with other people. After connecting billions of people by making Facebook, Messenger, Instagram and Whatsapp useful and ubiquitous, it’s safe to say that vision has been realized.
The vision then evolved from simply connecting people, to bringing them closer together. This vision is an optimistic one, as it hinges on the assumption that people will be responsible users of the tools offered.
Responsible and expected use is tricky with scale; when working with billions, there will inevitably be bad actors who think of the wildest use cases. Managing against bad actors has been an ongoing struggle for Facebook since it became the platform with the largest audience. Equipping that sheer quantity of people with features to reach so many other people easily placed a huge spotlight on Facebook. We watched so many groups and events in modern day history come to light, and we’ve all become more aware of the world around us as a result. I recall the days when hackers-of-sorts like Anonymous vowed to take Facebook down on November 5th 2011, or when social media platforms influenced how people participated in society during the Arab Spring. The latter may have been the first time social media’s power became obvious to the casual onlooker or news follower. And of course, the 2016 presidential election and Cambridge Analytica exposed how much social media can influence decisions that change the way the world works.
There are many pieces to the communication puzzle on top of reach and audience, but it boils down to the message and the medium of sending that message. Facebook cannot control the message, but the medium it provides is fully within their control. In the same way Ford cannot control whether or not a driver will use a car to inflict harm to others, Facebook cannot decide how people intend to use its features. However, Facebook is responsible for developing responsible functionality users engage with. And in the same way auto manufacturers purposefully use sensors to help prevent accidents, Facebook looks to build features while thinking what could be possible for a user to do. It’s important to empathize with how many edge cases they need to think of when making those decisions, and with this kind of scale, risk factor becomes an unusually heavy weight on the decision making.
With Mark at the helm, I trust that Facebook does the best possible job of ensuring the checks and balances are in place to moderate the message and prevent catastrophe — there are people and machines working overtime to moderate content, but again, its tough to manage at scale. When that’s the case, it may be better to pivot a vision.
Today, users can connect to others and get closer to them — but it’s for better and worse. The latter of which is highlighted by events like the Christchurch shootings on March 15th 2019. In my time studying political sciences, we learned that acts of terrorism have a simpler objective than we presume, the execution is where the complexity lies. In fact, a terrorist shares objectives with the marketing manager of your favourite potato chip brand: share a message with as many (relevant) people as possible.
In 2001, the tragic and vivid images of hijacked planes crashing through the Twin Towers was seared into memory. The events were broadcasted on every television network on the planet, and the reach was substantial. The terrorist objective was achieved by getting the message across to as many people as possible. The act itself was high effort as it required years of planning and complicated execution, but it produced high value to the terrorists by sheer number of people receiving the message, too. Today, Facebook Live Video in the open platform format has made it possible for a user to share a message with all Facebook users, if they tune in. The adoption of Facebook in 2019 makes it comparable to the adoption of television in 2001, so the value is comparable to terrorists, but the effort side of the equation is substantially lower. All it takes for a terrorist to share a message now is to gain access to a gun, flip a switch on Facebook and perform the act.
Mark has been the face of digital communication for nearly two decades of developments, which include both extreme highs and lows. The gravity of his decisions and his opinions on the future of the internet is influential for every user and non-user alike. On March 6th 2019, a few days prior to the tragedy in New Zealand, Mark shared the vision for a privacy-focused social network, away from the open-platform format it has historically been. There is no connection between the vision and the events, but it’s clear that social media needs a new direction, and the events that transpired validated the new vision he put forth.
An Emerging Behaviour
Switching gears to a lighter, more optimistic train of thought:
As Facebook built out Messenger, it became the quickest and most comfortable way of sharing content to those who mattered. Content could be exchanged via text, multimedia, voice or video and there are interactive components like games and event scheduling. Facebook still has no control over the message, but the medium moves away from mass broadcasting and towards bringing people closer.
But there are downsides to 1-to-1 conversation. Sometimes you run out of things to talk about, the other person is unavailable, and if one person drops off, then the conversation is dead and there’s nothing to come back to — no viral loop incentive or reward for returning.
Enter group messaging, the most comedic and entertaining way of using social media.
Groupchats address each of these issues. When you’re in a group, there’s:
- Multiple shared interests between individuals, and for the whole group
- More overlap of availability for real-time chat by having multiple members
- The “return to action” effect
When a conversation starter (often a meme) is sent to a groupchat, the active members can engage, and the inactive members have content to return to. Of course, it can become overwhelming to get back to 50+ messages if the group gets out of hand, but I’m sure there are solutions to that pain point in the works as groupchats continue to gain popularity.
As humans, we long to affiliate with a group or be part of the action, this is speaking to that innate desire. The Dark Social trend will grow, and there will be extensive commercial and non-commercial use cases that can extend from groupchats. I wrote about this a while back, but just think about what people do as individuals, or as part of a group, and why:
- Shopping — people browse or shop in-store individually, and share pictures with groups to get validation on what to buy. Imagine a groupchat where you can drop-in and shop collaboratively with all the perks of having your friends with you, just like group shopping trips.
- Travel — people plan to travel in groups for sharing exploratory experiences (and safety). Imagine a groupchat where you can search, plan and confirm itineraries collaboratively. We’re already seeing travel agents and travel enthusiasts interact with folks through groupchats in China. This can also extend to smaller trips, like organizing or scheduling a meet up at the most proximous Starbucks.
- Food — people order food together, and the more they do the more viable the delivery model becomes. This is relevant for those placing group orders at work through apps like DoorDash, or for people huddling around a single screen trying to decide on pizza toppings. Imagine a groupchat where you can put your thoughts down from the comfort of your own screen? *Chef’s Kiss*
Facebook is a for-profit company, and a solution that is desirable by users, feasible engineering wise, and especially viable to the business is needed when considering the move away from Newsfeed. For years, Newsfeed has been a power house for engagement and monetization, but it’s not a very private place anymore. Especially when we have growing lists of friends that you may or may not keep in touch with anymore. The trend of tagging folks in memes is in full force, and Facebook still lets everyone see whenever you like something. It’s not very desirable, and the recent removal of Instagram’s activity feed proves that it won’t be dearly missed to track everyone’s movements. Additionally, a smart move towards a purposeful, well-integrated, privacy-focused social network will reengage users (like me) who stopped posting status updates or posting on a friend’s timeline. That was cool in high school and maybe university, but not anymore. I prefer getting food with my friends now.
I can get behind a network that emphasizes purposeful usage, invited advertising and endless jokes with the squad.
