5 ms·

Youtube fulfills the desire to broadcast your life in a way Facebook really can't. I think the subscribers vs friends distinction is important here. Twitter fol

Youtube fulfills the desire to broadcast your life in a way Facebook really can't. I think the subscribers vs friends distinction is important here. Twitter followers work the same way. I don't get excited about random people adding me on Facebook, but if a bunch of people follow me on Twitter or subscribe to my channel, it's a different story. And Instagram + Snapchat are more about looking at what your friends are up to, and offer way more intimate experiences than Facebook. I have never seen a link to a news website or political ad on either platform, but Facebook is littered with them, and it crowds out the content I want to see: pictures of my friends doing cool stuff. If I want astroturfing and news, I go to reddit and HN :P So Facebook occupies the awkward middle ground, and most people I know use it to collect acquaintances and to exchange Instagram/Snapchat handles. Source: am teen

parvenu74 8y ago
I get the logic; I wonder if teen writers are attracted to platforms like medium which are both open yet have a certain "followers" aspect to it as well.
- eat_veggies 8y ago
  I don't have many writer friends, but I think most of them post fics and stuff on tumblr and the AO3. They have the same follower model as well. In fact, on the AO3 you can't even see who follows you, only a count of how many. Medium to me feels like it's mostly oriented for technical bloggers (even though it sucks for technical blogging!) and success bloggers that tell you to wake up at 4 AM and meditate.
  - tallanvor 8y ago
    What is "the AO3"?
    - philbarr 8y ago
      I had never heard of it but was curious enough to google it: https://archiveofourown.org/ https://archiveofourown.org/ "A fan-created, fan-run, non-profit, non-commercial archive for transformative fanworks, like fanfiction, fanart, fan videos, and podfic" Lots of stuff for fans, apparently.
- VLM 8y ago
  LiveJournal a decade+ ago.
josephjrobison 8y ago
As a 29 year old, I’ve just found YouTube much more interesting and actionable recently. Almost every topic is covered and the best content rises to the top. The recommendation engine is really good now. I’ve added more to my watch later list in the last 6 months than I have in the last 6 years combined. As an SEO I’m surprised to admit, but I find it better to search directly in YouTube than actual Google search for certain searches. Google was playing the loooong game on YouTube and it seems to be paying off.
- paulcole 8y ago
  > I’ve added more to my watch later list in the last 6 months than I have in the last 6 years combined. Are you actually watching it though?
  - fragmede 8y ago
    It's a fair question, but mostly irrelevant in this context. As long as users feel engaged with the site and are using it (and thus watching ads), it doesn't matter how long a users's 'watch later' list grows. I say "mostly" because there's likely some small effect from users who get overwhelmed by the length of their watch list and bounce from the site, but it's hard to avoid links to YouTube if you spend any time on the Internet.
    - erikpukinskis 8y ago
      The YouTube links thing is an interesting point. I wonder if that’s how Facebook’s decision to be a walled garden will come back to them. They prevented other sites from indexing and linking to content, but as a result there’s not as much organic traffic into Facebook to reactivate lapsed users. They planned for growth which will hurt their decline. The walled garden will continue being lucrative though. Especially if they win VR.
  - josephjrobison 8y ago
    Yea a portion of the watch later. The main signal there is that the recommendation engine is so much better than I see tons of recommended stuff that I automatically add to the watch later. In the past it was always - watch one video and bounce because there was a lot of low quality, irrelevant videos recommended.
dwoot 8y ago
That last sentence is so true now. I think Facebook lost itself as it has begun to try to become everything to everyone. The best version of the newsfeed was a newsfeed that could be filtered by content type. It was great when I could view just status updates or photos. Facebook serves a purpose, for me, that is similar to my Twitter now -- as a place to consume news from outlets I subscribe to, like ESPN, The Atlantic, Vox, etc. Facebook's best move, as a company, was the acquisition of Instagram. More is not always better. I think Facebook, some few years back, had a shot to build a video publishing platform that could have taken some slice of the pie from YouTube, but now they have a helluva lead. They also have broadcast television and have recently introduced easier ways to share content with those you're already connected to. It looks like the "walled garden" approach to content distribution and ultimately, the views, which drive advertising revenue is really hurting Facebook as a destination site now.

parvenu74 8y ago

I get the logic; I wonder if teen writers are attracted to platforms like medium which are both open yet have a certain "followers" aspect to it as well.

eat_veggies 8y ago
I don't have many writer friends, but I think most of them post fics and stuff on tumblr and the AO3. They have the same follower model as well. In fact, on the AO3 you can't even see who follows you, only a count of how many. Medium to me feels like it's mostly oriented for technical bloggers (even though it sucks for technical blogging!) and success bloggers that tell you to wake up at 4 AM and meditate.
- tallanvor 8y ago
  What is "the AO3"?
  - philbarr 8y ago
    I had never heard of it but was curious enough to google it: https://archiveofourown.org/ https://archiveofourown.org/ "A fan-created, fan-run, non-profit, non-commercial archive for transformative fanworks, like fanfiction, fanart, fan videos, and podfic" Lots of stuff for fans, apparently.
VLM 8y ago
LiveJournal a decade+ ago.

josephjrobison 8y ago

As a 29 year old, I’ve just found YouTube much more interesting and actionable recently. Almost every topic is covered and the best content rises to the top. The recommendation engine is really good now. I’ve added more to my watch later list in the last 6 months than I have in the last 6 years combined. As an SEO I’m surprised to admit, but I find it better to search directly in YouTube than actual Google search for certain searches. Google was playing the loooong game on YouTube and it seems to be paying off.

paulcole 8y ago
> I’ve added more to my watch later list in the last 6 months than I have in the last 6 years combined. Are you actually watching it though?
- fragmede 8y ago
  It's a fair question, but mostly irrelevant in this context. As long as users feel engaged with the site and are using it (and thus watching ads), it doesn't matter how long a users's 'watch later' list grows. I say "mostly" because there's likely some small effect from users who get overwhelmed by the length of their watch list and bounce from the site, but it's hard to avoid links to YouTube if you spend any time on the Internet.
  - erikpukinskis 8y ago
    The YouTube links thing is an interesting point. I wonder if that’s how Facebook’s decision to be a walled garden will come back to them. They prevented other sites from indexing and linking to content, but as a result there’s not as much organic traffic into Facebook to reactivate lapsed users. They planned for growth which will hurt their decline. The walled garden will continue being lucrative though. Especially if they win VR.
- josephjrobison 8y ago
  Yea a portion of the watch later. The main signal there is that the recommendation engine is so much better than I see tons of recommended stuff that I automatically add to the watch later. In the past it was always - watch one video and bounce because there was a lot of low quality, irrelevant videos recommended.

dwoot 8y ago

That last sentence is so true now. I think Facebook lost itself as it has begun to try to become everything to everyone. The best version of the newsfeed was a newsfeed that could be filtered by content type. It was great when I could view just status updates or photos. Facebook serves a purpose, for me, that is similar to my Twitter now -- as a place to consume news from outlets I subscribe to, like ESPN, The Atlantic, Vox, etc. Facebook's best move, as a company, was the acquisition of Instagram. More is not always better. I think Facebook, some few years back, had a shot to build a video publishing platform that could have taken some slice of the pie from YouTube, but now they have a helluva lead. They also have broadcast television and have recently introduced easier ways to share content with those you're already connected to. It looks like the "walled garden" approach to content distribution and ultimately, the views, which drive advertising revenue is really hurting Facebook as a destination site now.