3 ms·

> As noted by Daring Fireball > Any publisher that is dependent on Facebook, or that trusts Facebook, is out of their goddamn mind. I think it is okay to boot

by _rpd 9y ago

> As noted by Daring Fireball > Any publisher that is dependent on Facebook, or that trusts Facebook, is out of their goddamn mind. I think it is okay to bootstrap this way, but you must have an exit strategy.

wlesieutre 9y ago
Yeah. This isn't the first time we've seen Facebook pull the rug out on something. Used to be that my news feed was absolutely full of posts from the Facebook apps/games platform spamming your whole friends list to join into Mafia Wars or FarmVille. Eventually Facebook caught on that this was annoying and not a good use of the news feed, but if your business was dependent on it I imagine the effects were similar. Having seen that happen before, building a company based on what Facebook decides to put in the news feed sounds insane.
eli 9y ago
What would that even look like? I think it would be very hard to transition a Facebook-only audience to some other platform. Collect everyone's email address along the way? Then you might as well be an email newsletter business.
- WorldMaker 9y ago
  Give users reasons to engage with the website directly rather than always gated through someone else's experience? That doesn't necessarily mean "email newsletter business", it could be any of the number of ways businesses have tried to convert first impressions into continued engagement. The referral platform shouldn't particularly matter, really. Today's complaints about Facebook-driven traffic drying up are last century's complaints about Yellow Pages-driven phone calls drying up. How are you handling people after they arrived/called? What other avenues for referrals have you explored? There's a lot of business advice that I don't think has largely changed there anywhere near as much as the technology medium has.
  - eli 9y ago
    It's really hard to convince people to regularly "pull" content from you versus agreeing to have it "pushed" to them somehow. You need one heckuva brand. I like email because it's one of the only "push" media that's both widely deployed and decentralized. (I once thought RSS would become that for the web, but it hasn't worked out that way.) In any event, if you've been relying on Facebook to supply 75% of the traffic that goes in the top of the funnel, you're going to be having a bad day when that disappears. Even if the funnel is great.
    - WorldMaker 9y ago
      Just because it is hard doesn't mean the companies get a pass for not doing it. If you don't have a brand that users want to "pull" from you, what are you even doing as a publisher? That's almost Publishing 101. It's easy to blame Facebook for the hard work that they should have done all along, is all I'm saying here. ;) As an RSS fan (and still an active user), I do agree that one of the prime failings here was that publishers in general too strongly backed the Facebook horse instead of, say, training users about the advantages of RSS. But yeah, why do the hard work today when you can wait for the rug to pulled out from under you by a third party and then do the hard work anyway?

by _rpd 9y ago

wlesieutre 9y ago

Yeah. This isn't the first time we've seen Facebook pull the rug out on something. Used to be that my news feed was absolutely full of posts from the Facebook apps/games platform spamming your whole friends list to join into Mafia Wars or FarmVille. Eventually Facebook caught on that this was annoying and not a good use of the news feed, but if your business was dependent on it I imagine the effects were similar. Having seen that happen before, building a company based on what Facebook decides to put in the news feed sounds insane.

eli 9y ago

What would that even look like? I think it would be very hard to transition a Facebook-only audience to some other platform. Collect everyone's email address along the way? Then you might as well be an email newsletter business.

WorldMaker 9y ago
Give users reasons to engage with the website directly rather than always gated through someone else's experience? That doesn't necessarily mean "email newsletter business", it could be any of the number of ways businesses have tried to convert first impressions into continued engagement. The referral platform shouldn't particularly matter, really. Today's complaints about Facebook-driven traffic drying up are last century's complaints about Yellow Pages-driven phone calls drying up. How are you handling people after they arrived/called? What other avenues for referrals have you explored? There's a lot of business advice that I don't think has largely changed there anywhere near as much as the technology medium has.
- eli 9y ago
  It's really hard to convince people to regularly "pull" content from you versus agreeing to have it "pushed" to them somehow. You need one heckuva brand. I like email because it's one of the only "push" media that's both widely deployed and decentralized. (I once thought RSS would become that for the web, but it hasn't worked out that way.) In any event, if you've been relying on Facebook to supply 75% of the traffic that goes in the top of the funnel, you're going to be having a bad day when that disappears. Even if the funnel is great.
  - WorldMaker 9y ago
    Just because it is hard doesn't mean the companies get a pass for not doing it. If you don't have a brand that users want to "pull" from you, what are you even doing as a publisher? That's almost Publishing 101. It's easy to blame Facebook for the hard work that they should have done all along, is all I'm saying here. ;) As an RSS fan (and still an active user), I do agree that one of the prime failings here was that publishers in general too strongly backed the Facebook horse instead of, say, training users about the advantages of RSS. But yeah, why do the hard work today when you can wait for the rug to pulled out from under you by a third party and then do the hard work anyway?