3 ms·

Those numbers do not refute my statement. I'm assuming they are global and not for the U.S. Midwest? Also as I indicated just because a user logs in does not m

• jfengel 5y ago
  I don't have numbers for the Midwest, but this article[1] says the numbers for the US are basically stable. (Headline says "decline", but a number that small strikes me as margin-of-error stuff given the difficulty in measuring. Even stability would be worrying to Facebook, which depends on continued growth, though if the number really is 195 million, then that's such a huge fraction of the US that I'd think it's nearly saturated). It's possible that some regions are declining faster than others. But if the Midwest is like the rest of the US, a .5% decline isn't something that would be detectable with the naked eye. Even 2x or 3x that wouldn't really be obvious unless you were measuring. It's not impossible that they're measuring wrong, but the source of this data is their quarterly financial report, not a marketing document. [1] https://www.fastcompany.com/90598536/facebooks-daily-active-users-decline-for-a-second-quarter-in-the-united-states-and-canada https://www.fastcompany.com/90598536/facebooks-daily-active-...