3 ms·
Contextual Sharing (and the new social network that figures it out) will kill Facebook. I'm convinced that contextual sharing is the next evolution of social n
by waxman 16y ago
Contextual Sharing (and the new social network that figures it out) will kill Facebook.
I'm convinced that contextual sharing is the next evolution of social networks, and I don't think FB is in a position to pivot towards it.
Contextual sharing is the idea that in real life you have multiple, often separate social circles (work pals, college roommates, siblings, friends, grandparents, frat brothers, etc.), and that social networking 1.0 (i.e. facebook/twitter) doesn't account for this very well. You really want to share stuff only with specific groups, but this is hard to do on existing sites.
This leads to all sorts of real pain points, many of which are becoming unbearable for some users: i.e. you don't want your boss seeing photos of you drinking, or you don't want your grandmother to see that racy link you just posted, so you suspend your FB account.
Even though Facebook has a crude groups feature, this doesn't come close to addressing the fundamentally flawed orientation of the network: one, big pot of 100 to 1000 casual acquaintances, as opposed to dozens of partitioned ~2 to 10-person real social circles.
This idea has been exploding, recently:
- Google Me (Google's soon-to-be-released last shot at social) is almost certainly going to be based around this concept of contextual sharing (as Google UX engineer @padday's recent slide show indicated)
- Diaspora (the OSS project from NYU students that raised $200k this spring) announced on their blog that contextual sharing is their #1 interface priority
- Frid.ge (YC '10) is built around this idea
- College Only (funded by Peter Thiel) is a solution to the problem just for one context (college friends)
- Groupme.com (betaworks) is an SMS-only approach
And ALL of this projects came to life within the past 3 to 6 months!
Next-generation social networks will mirror our offline social experience more closely by shifting the focus from a giant network of "friends" to private, micro-networks that mimic real friend groups.
I think this change is significant enough that Facebook will be unable to pivot without alienating their huge user base.
Also, one of Facebook's main competitive advantages has been the fact that it is a network good with high switching costs (e.g. in order for a new site to be as good as facebook, you need to convince all of your 800 friends to sign up for the new site too).
If the future of social networking really is contextual sharing, though, this barrier becomes much lower (if it continues to exist at all), because if you really just want to share with your 'real' friends, then convincing these small groups whom you know really well (your best buds, or your roommates, or your sibilings, or whatever) to try out a new site is actually pretty trivial.
Thoughts?
Full-disclosure: I'm thinking of building a contextual sharing tool of my own, because I think it's so damn exciting. Would love your feedback.
- natrius 16y agoMy sub-optimal solution to this problem has been to use Facebook for personal stuff and Twitter for professional stuff. The problem you mention about your boss seeing drinking photos or your grandma seeing racy links is easy to avoid with Facebook today, but maybe not for users who don't know about the functionality. Put your boss in a friends list that can't access your photos. Click the lock button when you're posting the link and exclude your family members friends list. My problem is that I want almost everything to be visible to everyone, but I don't want to publish everything to everyone's news feeds and pollute them. Everyone has hobbies, interests or professions they enjoy talking about, but they don't want to burden all of their friends with those posts. If you can fix that without making me drag all of my friends to another social network, I'll use your tool in a heartbeat. I don't think it's possible for anyone but Facebook to meet those restrictions, since only they could change the way posting on Facebook works.
- waxman 16y agoI feel you. I think the "drinking photos" example is illustrative because it's extreme, but I think the real, widespread pain points --- I know the ones I have, at least --- are more along the lines you mentioned. Sure, you can put up certain walls relatively easy (i.e. only these friends can see my pictures). But I think you hit on the essence of contextual sharing, which is that privacy aside, you simply want to share different things with different people. I want to share the Paul Graham essay with only my start-up friends, I want to share the new NoSQL db github link with only my hacker friends, I want to talk smack about fantasy football with only those people, I want to post my family vacation pictures to only my family, etc.
- dstein 16y agoI think Diaspora and others will fail because it is tackling the problem from the wrong angle. I don't think people really want to micromanage things like that. Think about it. Every time you post a tweet, picture, blog post etc, do you want to meticulously decide who receives it, or would you rather click "all" and let everyone else decide whether they read/view it? Conceivably all facebook needs to do is tweak how you recieve messages a bit and these startups are toast. You can't defeat Facebook by adding one little feature Facebook doesn't have. You need to come up with a completely paradigm-shifting approach.