3 ms·

> Remember the conditions that led to Facebook’s rise in the first place: the company was able to circumvent Google, go directly to users, and build a walled ga

> Remember the conditions that led to Facebook’s rise in the first place: the company was able to circumvent Google, go directly to users, and build a walled garden of data that the search company couldn’t touch. Umm, not really. In the relatively early days of Facebook, Google allowed Facebook access to its "Contacts API" which let Facebook peek into your contacts and find out your GTalk/GMail contacts on Facebook. GTalk was the popular IM client pre-Facebook Messenger and your "social network" resided within your e-mail plus IM client. OTOH, Facebook did not allow access to its "Contacts List" citing privacy concerns (talk about irony!). Google eventually stopped Facebook from access to GMail/GTalk contact lists [0]. Facebook complained but did find a work around to export contact lists [1]. Twitter found a work around to get access to Facebook contact lists - by using the Facebook app for Twitter [2]. But lady irony died again when, Facebook blocked Twitter's ability to do so [3]. [0] https://techcrunch.com/2010/11/04/facebook-google-contacts/ https://techcrunch.com/2010/11/04/facebook-google-contacts/ [1] https://techcrunch.com/2010/11/08/facebook-finds-a-new-way-to-liberate-your-gmail-contact-data/ https://techcrunch.com/2010/11/08/facebook-finds-a-new-way-t... [2] https://techcrunch.com/2010/06/23/twitter-facebook-friends-linkedin/ https://techcrunch.com/2010/06/23/twitter-facebook-friends-l... [3] https://techcrunch.com/2010/06/23/facebook-blocks-twitter/ https://techcrunch.com/2010/06/23/facebook-blocks-twitter/

jedberg 8y ago
That's... exactly what the article says. That Facebook created a walled garden that Google couldn't get to.
- jdminhbg 8y ago
  I think the quibble is that Facebook didn't circumvent Google, they used an open API that Google themselves provided. It wasn't an end-around, it was just Google leaving the keys in the door.
  - acoard 8y ago
    The "circumvent" part is that Facebook's content isn't indexable by Google. For example, a website review on Yelp winds up on Google, but a review from Facebook won't show up. Insofar as they're creating content in a walled garden that Google can't access, they're circumventing Google. (It might not be the best usage of the word circumvent, but I still think it's clear what the author is going for here)

jedberg 8y ago

That's... exactly what the article says. That Facebook created a walled garden that Google couldn't get to.

jdminhbg 8y ago
I think the quibble is that Facebook didn't circumvent Google, they used an open API that Google themselves provided. It wasn't an end-around, it was just Google leaving the keys in the door.
- acoard 8y ago
  The "circumvent" part is that Facebook's content isn't indexable by Google. For example, a website review on Yelp winds up on Google, but a review from Facebook won't show up. Insofar as they're creating content in a walled garden that Google can't access, they're circumventing Google. (It might not be the best usage of the word circumvent, but I still think it's clear what the author is going for here)