6 ms·

Facebook.com is now the internet

67 points by koski 16y ago

iamdave 16y ago
As Web Professionals, we need to pay attention to this fundamental shift and act accordingly. How, by calling themselves social media experts? ....Oh.
code_duck 16y ago
No, this actually means Facebook is now AOL. They used to show "AOL Keywords" in the same places he mentions Facebook page URLs appearing.
- arturadib 16y ago
  But back then AOL was considered The Internet by many, so the author's point remains.
  - rmc 16y ago
    However within a few years it was irrelvant and the real internet remains.
  - cleverjake 16y ago
    Yes, but it was fairly short lived. What will be interesting to see is if the internet ebbs and tides between the open (early internet like usenet and bbs, and more or less current form of the internet), and closed (AOL, and possibly now facebook) or if this is a more permanent switch back to a comfort zone for people online.
  - smackay 16y ago
    So The Fates have decided the outcome. The only thing left to do is see how long Facebook's demise will take. It will be very interesting to see the outcome. I don't think Facebook will fade away, AOL style, however some form comparison will be useful to try and divine whether the factors that govern such sites have changed in the past few years - particularly since Facebook's users are more global than perhaps AOL's were.
  - kenjackson 16y ago
    But it wasn't and soon those on it knew it wasn't too.
- julian37 16y ago
  I really want that to be true, I want the Internet to be a level playing field where Facebook is just another company; where "Facebook URLs" are a short-lived fad that people will crack jokes about in a few years time. And chances are that you're right! I've got my fingers crossed. That said, you've got to admit that this is a different phenomena than AOL keywords. I've seen plenty of brick-and-mortar businesses lately that have a sign up proudly declaring "become our fan at facebook.com/abc", and I'm not even located in the US! I've encountered these signs in Australia and New Zealand, for what it's worth. In contrast, I don't recall ever seeing a sign up saying "Remember, our AOL keyword is 'abc'" or anything along those lines. The phenomenon is reminiscent but not comparable at all, in my opinion, if only because AOL was lacking the social aspect completely.
  - jgroome 16y ago
    I'm in the UK and see the same thing all the time. Just this morning I saw an ad for chips with a Facebook page URL at the bottom. http://www.facebook.com/McCainRusticChips http://www.facebook.com/McCainRusticChips Chips! On Facebook!
  - corin_ 16y ago
    In the UK at least it feels very much AOL --> Facebook, and for what it's worth I've always assumed that in that aspect we are just mimicking America (without having bothered to confirm that assumption). From (roughly, from memory) 2000 to only a couple of years ago I was regularly seeing "AOL Keyword: <blah>" in video more traditional (print/real-life) advertising. The biggest example that comes to mind is movie trailors, they ALWAYS promoted with AOL, but plenty of other brands were, too. Possibly the reason I always assumed that it carried over from America was the fact that, at least in my corner of England, AOL were reasonably irrelevant. I mean, they weren't unknown, or even unused, but they didn't exactly seem like a big player. (Again, this was during the latter part of my childhood, so this is from memory of my experience, not from analysing businesses at the time.)
  - jhowell 16y ago
    Advertisers paid big bucks for AOL Keywords.
- eik3_de 16y ago
  See http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2375715,00.asp http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2375715,00.asp
- dimitar 16y ago
  I hope Facebook is the "new AOL". However, AOL at its peak had 30 million subscribers. How many does Facebook have? Since 2001 internet use has made the share of AOL much smaller and still everyone needed to connect. There are many users since who have never seen AOL services in use, including myself. However, internet adoption in democratic non-banning societies is going to slow down (saturation) and Facebook is going to be even more integrated. And since we mostly communicate with people from the same country and even from the same city, growth in non-Facebook countries is not going to matter. What I would like to happen is that Facebook becomes obsolete or too annoying (like MySpace).
  - Swannie 16y ago
    I don't know how many customers Facebook has. Do you? It's certainly less than the 30 million customers AOL had. (Customer defined as someone who pays for service). Facebook has it's place for the people who like safe, controlled and easy. Like 30m AOL customers. MySpace was never safe, barely controlled and not really easy. AOL lost out because its model was broken - most people found the winder web more interesting than it's curated pages. Facebook doesn't curate it's own pages. It's a microcosm of the web. It is not going to fail in the same way as AOL or MySpace. I for one am happy for all this stuff to stay on Facebook, and for the wider web to contain the heavy-weight version.
mooism2 16y ago
It's not. Some people are holdouts. Foregoing a website in favour of a Facebook page means excluding these people. I don't see that replacing yourbrand.com with a redirect to facebook.com/yourbrand is a good idea.
- regularfry 16y ago
  There will always be holdouts - hell, I am one. If the demographics of your customers mean that you can safely ignore them, then why not?
ebaysucks 16y ago
Sooner or later there will be a HBS case showing social marketing returns are falling and the hype will be over. Currently Facebook might be AOL like, but it won't stay like that forever. A lot can change in a decade on the internet.
JacobAldridge 16y ago
I think this is far more true if your business is B2C (Business to Consumer) than if it's B2B (Business to Business). It might now be the internet for individuals, but I don't think it's there yet for companies. I use Facebook (when I do) in a very personal space. Brands whose pages I have liked are all personal - Get Into London Theatre, my work, my favourite film. I don't connect with any of my clients, or my corporate suppliers, on there. And I've had limited success promoting my business through FB, as opposed to LinkedIn (which I use in a very business space). (Obviously, what we've done with FB is not very good. That's not the logic behind my argument here, just another data point.) I do see an opportunity for businesses in the B2B space to use it better. It might now be the internet for individuals, not companies, but that doesn't mean my business shouldn't have a presence.
timclark 16y ago
Hooray! If all the advertising / marketing types can move to Facebook I can successfully ignore them just like I used to successfully ignore AOL keywords.
csomar 16y ago
Redirect people to your Facebook page, and since even dogs have Facebook profiles, the user will probably click the 'like' button, and may also share the page or invite a few friends. Companies now are looking for more fans because it means for them more coverage. The news they publish on their page will show up on the user page. But what will happen if all of the companies that exist in earth and other parts of the universe advertise heavily on Facebook? The typical user will have then a subscription to more than 1 thousand page and he'll probably end up watching what his friends are sharing. This is exactly what happened to Twitter, when web masters started to accumulate followers, but in the end it didn't work out. You can have 20K followers and barely 10 users read your tweet. And this is not only linked to Facebook, imagine you are watching a movie and get a break with 320 ads, will you remember any of them? What the conversion ratio will be?
- thomasz 16y ago
  > Companies now are looking for more fans because it means for them more coverage. The news they publish on their page will show up on the user page. But what will happen if all of the companies that exist in earth and other parts of the universe advertise heavily on Facebook? Users will get sick of being stuffed like a goose. Fast.
- notahacker 16y ago
  I'd predict Facebook will move to head that off by throttling fan page feeds for [non-paying] fan page owners.
fedd 16y ago
i am not using fb. may i not pay for the internet access?
patio11 16y ago
Fads among Madison avenue creative agencies do not the Internet make. (Anybody remember the Starburst wikiTweetBook promotion?)
- stcredzero 16y ago
  Here's a formula for success: 1 - Figure out what tech the hardcore technorati snubs. 2 - Note the subset of this which has mainstream traction. 3 - Implement something with value (while the techie snobs look on in disdain) 4 - Succeed Who has used this strategy? YouTube. (Which is why I couldn't say "Profit.")
  - Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
    Util you can say profit, your definition of success is going to be somewhat shaky.
    - stcredzero 16y ago
      I would still like to have had the success of YouTube. And I bet if you look hard enough, you'll find some niche where someone has followed those steps, but with #4 - Profit!
  - ramchip 16y ago
    Who are those hardcore technorati and where do they bash Youtube?
    - stcredzero 16y ago
      I was one. Everyone who could've been YouTube, were it not for the fact that they disdained Flash Video and were looking at a "more elegant technology."
- keefe 16y ago
  well said, plus I'm sure facebook is involved in encouraging this trend
mbesto 16y ago
AOL: Keyword
Tichy 16y ago
What utility do these Facebook pages of companies offer, other than allowing me to become a fan? I am not even sure if I want to have news feeds of my favorite products. Quite the other way round: I like products that have a high quality and last for a very long time. This implies that once I buy it, I don't need a news stream about it for a very long time anymore, either. The product should stay out of my way and do what it is designed to do. Also, it would embarrass me to advertise stuff to my friends.
- wyclif 16y ago
  I am a fan of a number of consumer brands on Facebook, and occasionally I'll experiment with Liking them just to see if they are doing a lot of branding and interaction with customers. But I notice that I don't get much value from these Fan pages. Most of them don't offer me any incentive to come back, and don't tell me much more than what I already know about the product. I think it's smart to promote a brand or B2C company there because of the numbers, but I wonder if the conversions created are all that big.
  - klbarry 16y ago
    Just from my experience/research, it seems to convert pretty terribly to sales. Certainly in Patio11's experience, FB ads don't convert at all.
- ryancarson 16y ago
  The most powerful utility is being able to message your fans. It's like getting them on your email list, but even more powerful because sharing and commenting are viral and easy.
dustinupdyke 16y ago
It is questionable strategy to give control of your brand over to another party. I also wonder how companies are truly monetizing their FB traffic.
lpereira74 16y ago
For most non-technical people AOL was also the internet back in the day. Today Facebook makes it easy for most non-technical people to publish, share, and network. High-speed broadband was the disruptive force for AOL and it's only a matter of time before something else comes along that will disrupt Facebook's wall garden. When most non-technical people realize they can do the same things on Facebook with a new technology that is more open they will switch.
marknutter 16y ago
I can remember a few years ago companies were just saying "Google <our brand>" instead of giving out the URL. I think it's all just a way to make it easier for people to find their sites. People are very used to using Google and Facebook so why not give out information in terms of those services?
tintin 16y ago
"Love it or hate it, I guess I was right when I said you need to jump back into Facebook." Well I guess he was wrong twice. "so they re-direct the .com to Facebook. Scary." How is this scary? They will never do this. Branding is very important for large companies. You cannot afford letting people think about Facebook when instead they should think about Doritos. They just use Facebook so people can easily find there corporate website. But as csomar points out: it will only last a minute. QR-codes are the new hyperlinks.
- ryancarson 16y ago
  Never say never. If potential firehose of traffic available on FB will far surpass what most companies can generate for their stand-alone sites. Once they realize they only have enough budget to put towards one area online, then they might choose their Facebook page, as it's yielding more results.
cleverjake 16y ago
The author does seem to miss the point that this is really only about brand engagement. I do not know anyone who would even consider /buying/ doritos from facebook (or online at all I suppose), but may have an interest in letting others know how much they like it. This is what a majority of product based companies are looking for in their website, so a low cost website with incredible traffic potential is an easy choice over creating a completely unique site. Unless facebook releases a vending front, like amazon marketplace, that would allow small companies to easily sell goods through facebook itself.
alecco 16y ago
Linkbait blogpost to stir the pot. The blogger writes about his experience watching the Doritos Super Bowl ad having a facebook link at the end and how it was an epiphany or something about Facebook being "the Internet." With only 3 short paragraphs and an embedded video with the ad in question. Don't waste your time.
- JonnieCache 16y ago
  Silliest thing is, companies have been linking to their fb pages in their ads like this for at least four years now. In the UK anyway.
chopsueyar 16y ago
Justin.tv is now thepiratebay of TV networks?
- bambax 16y ago
  It's been that for quite a while; my brother in law was living in Canada last year, and in order to watch soccer games that could only be found on French Canal+ he tuned in to Justin TV...
gst 16y ago
"Love it or hate it, I guess I was right when I said you need to jump back into Facebook. As Web Professionals, we need to pay attention to this fundamental shift and act accordingly." Just because someone else is doing something does not mean that I need to do the same thing. If you see an advantage in using Facebook then do it. But think for yourself and don't just follow the other Lemmings.
- Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
  I don't think he's saying you've got to use it, just you need to be aware of it, understand it and understand how and why people are using it.
MaxGabriel 16y ago
Wasn't this same claim made by Wired, albeit with different reasons for their conclusion? I remember John Gruber and several others denounced the story at the time, but I can only find the DF link http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/08/17/wired-translation http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/08/17/wired-translatio...
davidhollander 16y ago
> facebook.com/doritos facebook.com appears to be a distraction black hole, sucking all other useless advertising sites and hypercasual games into it. This is largely a good thing, as you'll now only have to remember one domain name not to visit.
rythie 16y ago
This is about subscriptions vs. a one time visit. I'll probably only visit their website once, but if I 'like' them on facebook, they can push stuff at me, any time they want, promotions, new products etc.
cosmicray 16y ago
This is some truth to this. FB is a walled, semi-curated, subset of the internet. It has inertia and, for all those who don't want the general hassles associated with the internet at large, may be a perfect 5-minute solution. The local red-neck bar has a FB page. Think about that.
toddmorey 16y ago
New media outlets are always abused blatantly before they are used properly. As a site about a phone, the Xperia Play "site" (it's only a facebook fan page) gets an F. No photos, no technical specs... if you are looking for information about the phone, about the only thing it does is get in your way. You have to like the page just to see it's only video. It's as if Best Buy made me call a friend just to look around the store. To hang around long term, these brand pages will have to start offering genuine utility of some kind--and that's the same challenge for every site or trend on the internet.
jimmyjazz14 16y ago
Marketing is about reaching the most people, now ask yourself which way reaches more people, Facebook which has millions of users already or some web site your company threw together? If its any mystery to you then you probably fail to understand the point of advertising.
infocaptor 16y ago
During the dotcom book, "number of eyeballs" was the metric. Now it "number of Fans" and "number of followers". History repeats...again
Bitmobrich 16y ago
This has happened before, in 2000 every one was directing you to their myspace page. In the mid 90's it was a AOL keyword, late 90's is was their website. Next will be twitter.

67 points by koski 16y ago

As Web Professionals, we need to pay attention to this fundamental shift and act accordingly. How, by calling themselves social media experts? ....Oh.

code_duck 16y ago

No, this actually means Facebook is now AOL. They used to show "AOL Keywords" in the same places he mentions Facebook page URLs appearing.

arturadib 16y ago
But back then AOL was considered The Internet by many, so the author's point remains.
- rmc 16y ago
  However within a few years it was irrelvant and the real internet remains.
- cleverjake 16y ago
  Yes, but it was fairly short lived. What will be interesting to see is if the internet ebbs and tides between the open (early internet like usenet and bbs, and more or less current form of the internet), and closed (AOL, and possibly now facebook) or if this is a more permanent switch back to a comfort zone for people online.
- smackay 16y ago
  So The Fates have decided the outcome. The only thing left to do is see how long Facebook's demise will take. It will be very interesting to see the outcome. I don't think Facebook will fade away, AOL style, however some form comparison will be useful to try and divine whether the factors that govern such sites have changed in the past few years - particularly since Facebook's users are more global than perhaps AOL's were.
- kenjackson 16y ago
  But it wasn't and soon those on it knew it wasn't too.
julian37 16y ago
I really want that to be true, I want the Internet to be a level playing field where Facebook is just another company; where "Facebook URLs" are a short-lived fad that people will crack jokes about in a few years time. And chances are that you're right! I've got my fingers crossed. That said, you've got to admit that this is a different phenomena than AOL keywords. I've seen plenty of brick-and-mortar businesses lately that have a sign up proudly declaring "become our fan at facebook.com/abc", and I'm not even located in the US! I've encountered these signs in Australia and New Zealand, for what it's worth. In contrast, I don't recall ever seeing a sign up saying "Remember, our AOL keyword is 'abc'" or anything along those lines. The phenomenon is reminiscent but not comparable at all, in my opinion, if only because AOL was lacking the social aspect completely.
- jgroome 16y ago
  I'm in the UK and see the same thing all the time. Just this morning I saw an ad for chips with a Facebook page URL at the bottom. http://www.facebook.com/McCainRusticChips http://www.facebook.com/McCainRusticChips Chips! On Facebook!
- corin_ 16y ago
  In the UK at least it feels very much AOL --> Facebook, and for what it's worth I've always assumed that in that aspect we are just mimicking America (without having bothered to confirm that assumption). From (roughly, from memory) 2000 to only a couple of years ago I was regularly seeing "AOL Keyword: <blah>" in video more traditional (print/real-life) advertising. The biggest example that comes to mind is movie trailors, they ALWAYS promoted with AOL, but plenty of other brands were, too. Possibly the reason I always assumed that it carried over from America was the fact that, at least in my corner of England, AOL were reasonably irrelevant. I mean, they weren't unknown, or even unused, but they didn't exactly seem like a big player. (Again, this was during the latter part of my childhood, so this is from memory of my experience, not from analysing businesses at the time.)
- jhowell 16y ago
  Advertisers paid big bucks for AOL Keywords.
eik3_de 16y ago
See http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2375715,00.asp http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2375715,00.asp
dimitar 16y ago
I hope Facebook is the "new AOL". However, AOL at its peak had 30 million subscribers. How many does Facebook have? Since 2001 internet use has made the share of AOL much smaller and still everyone needed to connect. There are many users since who have never seen AOL services in use, including myself. However, internet adoption in democratic non-banning societies is going to slow down (saturation) and Facebook is going to be even more integrated. And since we mostly communicate with people from the same country and even from the same city, growth in non-Facebook countries is not going to matter. What I would like to happen is that Facebook becomes obsolete or too annoying (like MySpace).
- Swannie 16y ago
  I don't know how many customers Facebook has. Do you? It's certainly less than the 30 million customers AOL had. (Customer defined as someone who pays for service). Facebook has it's place for the people who like safe, controlled and easy. Like 30m AOL customers. MySpace was never safe, barely controlled and not really easy. AOL lost out because its model was broken - most people found the winder web more interesting than it's curated pages. Facebook doesn't curate it's own pages. It's a microcosm of the web. It is not going to fail in the same way as AOL or MySpace. I for one am happy for all this stuff to stay on Facebook, and for the wider web to contain the heavy-weight version.

mooism2 16y ago

It's not. Some people are holdouts. Foregoing a website in favour of a Facebook page means excluding these people. I don't see that replacing yourbrand.com with a redirect to facebook.com/yourbrand is a good idea.

regularfry 16y ago
There will always be holdouts - hell, I am one. If the demographics of your customers mean that you can safely ignore them, then why not?

ebaysucks 16y ago

Sooner or later there will be a HBS case showing social marketing returns are falling and the hype will be over. Currently Facebook might be AOL like, but it won't stay like that forever. A lot can change in a decade on the internet.

JacobAldridge 16y ago

I think this is far more true if your business is B2C (Business to Consumer) than if it's B2B (Business to Business). It might now be the internet for individuals, but I don't think it's there yet for companies. I use Facebook (when I do) in a very personal space. Brands whose pages I have liked are all personal - Get Into London Theatre, my work, my favourite film. I don't connect with any of my clients, or my corporate suppliers, on there. And I've had limited success promoting my business through FB, as opposed to LinkedIn (which I use in a very business space). (Obviously, what we've done with FB is not very good. That's not the logic behind my argument here, just another data point.) I do see an opportunity for businesses in the B2B space to use it better. It might now be the internet for individuals, not companies, but that doesn't mean my business shouldn't have a presence.

timclark 16y ago

Hooray! If all the advertising / marketing types can move to Facebook I can successfully ignore them just like I used to successfully ignore AOL keywords.

csomar 16y ago

Redirect people to your Facebook page, and since even dogs have Facebook profiles, the user will probably click the 'like' button, and may also share the page or invite a few friends. Companies now are looking for more fans because it means for them more coverage. The news they publish on their page will show up on the user page. But what will happen if all of the companies that exist in earth and other parts of the universe advertise heavily on Facebook? The typical user will have then a subscription to more than 1 thousand page and he'll probably end up watching what his friends are sharing. This is exactly what happened to Twitter, when web masters started to accumulate followers, but in the end it didn't work out. You can have 20K followers and barely 10 users read your tweet. And this is not only linked to Facebook, imagine you are watching a movie and get a break with 320 ads, will you remember any of them? What the conversion ratio will be?

thomasz 16y ago
> Companies now are looking for more fans because it means for them more coverage. The news they publish on their page will show up on the user page. But what will happen if all of the companies that exist in earth and other parts of the universe advertise heavily on Facebook? Users will get sick of being stuffed like a goose. Fast.
notahacker 16y ago
I'd predict Facebook will move to head that off by throttling fan page feeds for [non-paying] fan page owners.

fedd 16y ago

i am not using fb. may i not pay for the internet access?

patio11 16y ago

Fads among Madison avenue creative agencies do not the Internet make. (Anybody remember the Starburst wikiTweetBook promotion?)

stcredzero 16y ago
Here's a formula for success: 1 - Figure out what tech the hardcore technorati snubs. 2 - Note the subset of this which has mainstream traction. 3 - Implement something with value (while the techie snobs look on in disdain) 4 - Succeed Who has used this strategy? YouTube. (Which is why I couldn't say "Profit.")
- Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
  Util you can say profit, your definition of success is going to be somewhat shaky.
  - stcredzero 16y ago
    I would still like to have had the success of YouTube. And I bet if you look hard enough, you'll find some niche where someone has followed those steps, but with #4 - Profit!
- ramchip 16y ago
  Who are those hardcore technorati and where do they bash Youtube?
  - stcredzero 16y ago
    I was one. Everyone who could've been YouTube, were it not for the fact that they disdained Flash Video and were looking at a "more elegant technology."
keefe 16y ago
well said, plus I'm sure facebook is involved in encouraging this trend

mbesto 16y ago

AOL: Keyword

Tichy 16y ago

What utility do these Facebook pages of companies offer, other than allowing me to become a fan? I am not even sure if I want to have news feeds of my favorite products. Quite the other way round: I like products that have a high quality and last for a very long time. This implies that once I buy it, I don't need a news stream about it for a very long time anymore, either. The product should stay out of my way and do what it is designed to do. Also, it would embarrass me to advertise stuff to my friends.

wyclif 16y ago
I am a fan of a number of consumer brands on Facebook, and occasionally I'll experiment with Liking them just to see if they are doing a lot of branding and interaction with customers. But I notice that I don't get much value from these Fan pages. Most of them don't offer me any incentive to come back, and don't tell me much more than what I already know about the product. I think it's smart to promote a brand or B2C company there because of the numbers, but I wonder if the conversions created are all that big.
- klbarry 16y ago
  Just from my experience/research, it seems to convert pretty terribly to sales. Certainly in Patio11's experience, FB ads don't convert at all.
ryancarson 16y ago
The most powerful utility is being able to message your fans. It's like getting them on your email list, but even more powerful because sharing and commenting are viral and easy.

dustinupdyke 16y ago

It is questionable strategy to give control of your brand over to another party. I also wonder how companies are truly monetizing their FB traffic.

lpereira74 16y ago

For most non-technical people AOL was also the internet back in the day. Today Facebook makes it easy for most non-technical people to publish, share, and network. High-speed broadband was the disruptive force for AOL and it's only a matter of time before something else comes along that will disrupt Facebook's wall garden. When most non-technical people realize they can do the same things on Facebook with a new technology that is more open they will switch.

marknutter 16y ago

I can remember a few years ago companies were just saying "Google <our brand>" instead of giving out the URL. I think it's all just a way to make it easier for people to find their sites. People are very used to using Google and Facebook so why not give out information in terms of those services?

tintin 16y ago

"Love it or hate it, I guess I was right when I said you need to jump back into Facebook." Well I guess he was wrong twice. "so they re-direct the .com to Facebook. Scary." How is this scary? They will never do this. Branding is very important for large companies. You cannot afford letting people think about Facebook when instead they should think about Doritos. They just use Facebook so people can easily find there corporate website. But as csomar points out: it will only last a minute. QR-codes are the new hyperlinks.

ryancarson 16y ago
Never say never. If potential firehose of traffic available on FB will far surpass what most companies can generate for their stand-alone sites. Once they realize they only have enough budget to put towards one area online, then they might choose their Facebook page, as it's yielding more results.

cleverjake 16y ago

The author does seem to miss the point that this is really only about brand engagement. I do not know anyone who would even consider /buying/ doritos from facebook (or online at all I suppose), but may have an interest in letting others know how much they like it. This is what a majority of product based companies are looking for in their website, so a low cost website with incredible traffic potential is an easy choice over creating a completely unique site. Unless facebook releases a vending front, like amazon marketplace, that would allow small companies to easily sell goods through facebook itself.

alecco 16y ago

Linkbait blogpost to stir the pot. The blogger writes about his experience watching the Doritos Super Bowl ad having a facebook link at the end and how it was an epiphany or something about Facebook being "the Internet." With only 3 short paragraphs and an embedded video with the ad in question. Don't waste your time.

JonnieCache 16y ago
Silliest thing is, companies have been linking to their fb pages in their ads like this for at least four years now. In the UK anyway.

chopsueyar 16y ago

Justin.tv is now thepiratebay of TV networks?

bambax 16y ago
It's been that for quite a while; my brother in law was living in Canada last year, and in order to watch soccer games that could only be found on French Canal+ he tuned in to Justin TV...

gst 16y ago

"Love it or hate it, I guess I was right when I said you need to jump back into Facebook. As Web Professionals, we need to pay attention to this fundamental shift and act accordingly." Just because someone else is doing something does not mean that I need to do the same thing. If you see an advantage in using Facebook then do it. But think for yourself and don't just follow the other Lemmings.

Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
I don't think he's saying you've got to use it, just you need to be aware of it, understand it and understand how and why people are using it.

MaxGabriel 16y ago

Wasn't this same claim made by Wired, albeit with different reasons for their conclusion? I remember John Gruber and several others denounced the story at the time, but I can only find the DF link http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/08/17/wired-translation http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/08/17/wired-translatio...

davidhollander 16y ago

> facebook.com/doritos facebook.com appears to be a distraction black hole, sucking all other useless advertising sites and hypercasual games into it. This is largely a good thing, as you'll now only have to remember one domain name not to visit.

rythie 16y ago

This is about subscriptions vs. a one time visit. I'll probably only visit their website once, but if I 'like' them on facebook, they can push stuff at me, any time they want, promotions, new products etc.

cosmicray 16y ago

This is some truth to this. FB is a walled, semi-curated, subset of the internet. It has inertia and, for all those who don't want the general hassles associated with the internet at large, may be a perfect 5-minute solution. The local red-neck bar has a FB page. Think about that.

toddmorey 16y ago

New media outlets are always abused blatantly before they are used properly. As a site about a phone, the Xperia Play "site" (it's only a facebook fan page) gets an F. No photos, no technical specs... if you are looking for information about the phone, about the only thing it does is get in your way. You have to like the page just to see it's only video. It's as if Best Buy made me call a friend just to look around the store. To hang around long term, these brand pages will have to start offering genuine utility of some kind--and that's the same challenge for every site or trend on the internet.

jimmyjazz14 16y ago

Marketing is about reaching the most people, now ask yourself which way reaches more people, Facebook which has millions of users already or some web site your company threw together? If its any mystery to you then you probably fail to understand the point of advertising.

infocaptor 16y ago

During the dotcom book, "number of eyeballs" was the metric. Now it "number of Fans" and "number of followers". History repeats...again

Bitmobrich 16y ago

This has happened before, in 2000 every one was directing you to their myspace page. In the mid 90's it was a AOL keyword, late 90's is was their website. Next will be twitter.