5 ms·

I suspect that if Will Oremus wrote a shorter version of that post on reddit or HN, he'd get downvoted to oblivion. The meme of "if you're not paying for it, y

by jasode 9y ago

I suspect that if Will Oremus wrote a shorter version of that post on reddit or HN, he'd get downvoted to oblivion. The meme of "if you're not paying for it, you're the customer not the product" has become a moral chorus. I'm ok with repeating that meme as a defensive mental checkpoint. Say it to remind oneself to limit data as much as possible to prevent its monetization for Facebook's advantage. However, I also understand the author's point that it's a thought-stopping soundbite that miseducates people on the economics of multi-sided platforms. The "you're the product" labels us as sheeple. Unfortunately, we don't seem to have another neutral word to describe audiences as quasi-non-paying-customers. Another example other than Facebook might be jazz festivals in the USA. A lot of jazz festivals organized by cities have free attendance. If the attendees don't pay, how do they pay the musicians? The cities rent space to vendors in the park to sell food and drinks. It's so critical that they sell enough food & drinks to break even (or make a small profit) that they make rules preventing attendees from bringing in their own food.[1] It's a multi-sided economy: (1) the attendees, (2) the musicians, (3) the vendors, and (4) the city The interesting point is that when I was growing up and attending these free festivals every year, nobody said, "you know at the Jazz Festival, you're not the customer, you're the product." There was no derogatory meme like that for those shows. (Even if there was, most of us would still go because we want to go see Herbie Hancock play piano.) There is a similarity between jazz festival attendees and Facebook users ... the consumers of free services in a multi-sided exchange ... but we don't seem to have a non-derogatory label for it. [1] http://www.nejazzwinefest.org/festival-dos-and-donts.html http://www.nejazzwinefest.org/festival-dos-and-donts.html

willoremus 9y ago
This is a good analogy. Near the bottom of my piece I propose, "If you're not paying for it with money, you're paying for it in some other way." Admittedly that's fairly clunky. In a critique of my piece on Twitter, NY Magazine's Max Read suggests, more succinctly: "There's no such thing as a free lunch" https://twitter.com/max_read/status/989893433639755776 https://twitter.com/max_read/status/989893433639755776 That bit of folk wisdom isn't going to wow anybody in a TED Talk, but I think it's more apt than "you're the product."
- lotu 9y ago
  Or how about “If you are’t paying with money, you’re paying with time or attention”
hamburga 9y ago
Except that free jazz festivals aren't public venture-backed companies with every incentive to grow and maximize profit. If they were, they'd also extract a lot more out of you, and more aggressively, in order to compensate for the free attendance.
fullshark 9y ago
I think it’s an over correction for the reality distortion fields these companies project surrounding their purpose.
jcbrand 9y ago
The organizers of a free jazz festival don't record your attendance, what you bought, how often you went to the bathroom or who you went with.
- jasode 9y ago
  That's correct but you're not playing along with the analogy. Analogies are not meant to be exactly the same. The analogy for the jazz festival is that the hungry & thirsty attendees in a "walled-garden" of the park are offered up as so-called "products" to the vendors to be sold food & drink. Hence, "You Are The Product". If we want to dismantle the analogy in the direction of Facebook, we could complain that "Facebook doesn't sell food & drink to the web surfer so I don't see how the jazz festival applies." Well, that's how analogies work. You have to look for the commonalities instead of the differences.
  - adamconroy 9y ago
    Analogies are good at explaining difficult to understand concepts but shouldn't be used to arrive at decisions or axioms. Each situation or argument should be evaluated on its own. In other words, whilst the jazz festival and facebook models are analogously similar, just because you accept one as harmless doesn't mean the other isn't harmful.
    - jasode 9y ago
      >, just because you accept one as harmless doesn't mean the other isn't harmful. I never said Facebook isn't harmful. My analogy was not an apologetic defense of Facebook. It's unfortunate that I can't even discuss Facebook in an intellectual and detached manner without first prefacing it with the "Facebook-is-my-enemy" street credentials first.[1][2] I've never had a Facebook account and I never will.[3] My analogy is specifically about "product" being a label that (unintentionally) makes people dumber, not smarter, about the economics of multi-sided markets. I found it fascinating that attendees to music festivals were not hammered with the pejorative label "you are the product" -- even though that's what they were. The analogy points out that to "get something for free" in a multi-sided market, an indirect payment has to be made to make that happen -- and it happens in other businesses besides Facebook. [1] Previously wrote that Facebook is a "devolves into a worthless waste of time": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16360609 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16360609 [2] Previously wrote that Facebook drives people apart instead of bringing them together: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15676544 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15676544 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14397109 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14397109
autokad 9y ago
Its also interesting people are quick to blame social media for polarization. It plays its part, but I think it plays less a role as say shows like john oliver and the daily show. The audience spends 30 minutes having their opinion spit back to them by making others that disagree with them come from the point of view of bafoons. usually by means taking things out of context.
- SiempreViernes 9y ago
  It seems pretty nonsensical to claim a show that merely repeats the opinion of people somehow polarises opinions. If people are just there to hear what they already think they can hardly become more polarised, and if people get their opinions influenced then by necessity they heard new things. Further, people have indeed been influenced by media before facebook, but to deny the extremist recruitment that happens trough it seems just foolish.
drzaiusapelord 9y ago
>The "you're the product" labels us as sheeple. Why? I use a lot of services knowing that they are spying on me and selling my data. In those cases I think the service is worth it. You don't need to be some kind of sheep to make this economic decision. The sooner people realize that we truly are the product in these circumstances (and other non-online activities) the better as they'll be more educated in respect to what they're choosing to be part of. Sugar coating it or bringing up its complexity doesn't really help. That saying is perfectly valid as-is and should be a message worth promoting. Hemming and hawing about it not being totally accurate doesn't seem to be helping things.

by jasode 9y ago

willoremus 9y ago

This is a good analogy. Near the bottom of my piece I propose, "If you're not paying for it with money, you're paying for it in some other way." Admittedly that's fairly clunky. In a critique of my piece on Twitter, NY Magazine's Max Read suggests, more succinctly: "There's no such thing as a free lunch" https://twitter.com/max_read/status/989893433639755776 https://twitter.com/max_read/status/989893433639755776 That bit of folk wisdom isn't going to wow anybody in a TED Talk, but I think it's more apt than "you're the product."

lotu 9y ago
Or how about “If you are’t paying with money, you’re paying with time or attention”

hamburga 9y ago

Except that free jazz festivals aren't public venture-backed companies with every incentive to grow and maximize profit. If they were, they'd also extract a lot more out of you, and more aggressively, in order to compensate for the free attendance.

fullshark 9y ago

I think it’s an over correction for the reality distortion fields these companies project surrounding their purpose.

jcbrand 9y ago

The organizers of a free jazz festival don't record your attendance, what you bought, how often you went to the bathroom or who you went with.

jasode 9y ago
That's correct but you're not playing along with the analogy. Analogies are not meant to be exactly the same. The analogy for the jazz festival is that the hungry & thirsty attendees in a "walled-garden" of the park are offered up as so-called "products" to the vendors to be sold food & drink. Hence, "You Are The Product". If we want to dismantle the analogy in the direction of Facebook, we could complain that "Facebook doesn't sell food & drink to the web surfer so I don't see how the jazz festival applies." Well, that's how analogies work. You have to look for the commonalities instead of the differences.
- adamconroy 9y ago
  Analogies are good at explaining difficult to understand concepts but shouldn't be used to arrive at decisions or axioms. Each situation or argument should be evaluated on its own. In other words, whilst the jazz festival and facebook models are analogously similar, just because you accept one as harmless doesn't mean the other isn't harmful.
  - jasode 9y ago
    >, just because you accept one as harmless doesn't mean the other isn't harmful. I never said Facebook isn't harmful. My analogy was not an apologetic defense of Facebook. It's unfortunate that I can't even discuss Facebook in an intellectual and detached manner without first prefacing it with the "Facebook-is-my-enemy" street credentials first.[1][2] I've never had a Facebook account and I never will.[3] My analogy is specifically about "product" being a label that (unintentionally) makes people dumber, not smarter, about the economics of multi-sided markets. I found it fascinating that attendees to music festivals were not hammered with the pejorative label "you are the product" -- even though that's what they were. The analogy points out that to "get something for free" in a multi-sided market, an indirect payment has to be made to make that happen -- and it happens in other businesses besides Facebook. [1] Previously wrote that Facebook is a "devolves into a worthless waste of time": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16360609 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16360609 [2] Previously wrote that Facebook drives people apart instead of bringing them together: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15676544 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15676544 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14397109 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14397109

autokad 9y ago

Its also interesting people are quick to blame social media for polarization. It plays its part, but I think it plays less a role as say shows like john oliver and the daily show. The audience spends 30 minutes having their opinion spit back to them by making others that disagree with them come from the point of view of bafoons. usually by means taking things out of context.

SiempreViernes 9y ago
It seems pretty nonsensical to claim a show that merely repeats the opinion of people somehow polarises opinions. If people are just there to hear what they already think they can hardly become more polarised, and if people get their opinions influenced then by necessity they heard new things. Further, people have indeed been influenced by media before facebook, but to deny the extremist recruitment that happens trough it seems just foolish.

drzaiusapelord 9y ago

>The "you're the product" labels us as sheeple. Why? I use a lot of services knowing that they are spying on me and selling my data. In those cases I think the service is worth it. You don't need to be some kind of sheep to make this economic decision. The sooner people realize that we truly are the product in these circumstances (and other non-online activities) the better as they'll be more educated in respect to what they're choosing to be part of. Sugar coating it or bringing up its complexity doesn't really help. That saying is perfectly valid as-is and should be a message worth promoting. Hemming and hawing about it not being totally accurate doesn't seem to be helping things.