3 ms·
The selection of websites listed is sort of weird. Buzzfeed I get but the others aren't high on my radar. I'm guessing the graphs would look different with diff
by skywhopper 11y ago
The selection of websites listed is sort of weird. Buzzfeed I get but the others aren't high on my radar. I'm guessing the graphs would look different with different websites to analyze.
But more than that, this analysis sort of presents a tautology. Yes, Facebook is king of Facebook-style sharing. No one is surprised. What, you say Pinterest doesn't have a ton of National Geographic articles shared compared to Facebook? Not a surprise, given the nature of Pinterest. Twitter is also not the same sort of social network. LinkedIn? Google+? These are not the same sorts of sites at all.
Meanwhile, the article totally ignores Tumblr, Snapchat, and who knows what other sites I know nothing about.
In summary, Facebook has won at being Facebook. Other sites have different purposes, and their users use them differently.
- skewart 11y agoI had the same thought. It was a bizarre selection of media companies and other "social" sites. It seems like either naive, amateur analysis, or else they cherry picked the data to make a popular perception of fb look as dramatically true as possible. I'm inclined to give their integrity the benefit of the doubt and assume they just didn't really think this one through.