3 ms·
I've seen people for which it replaced Facebook. (Not Instagram, Facebook. Instagram is their non-volatile memory, in this case.) For these groups, having a Fac
by striking 11y ago
I've seen people for which it replaced Facebook. (Not Instagram, Facebook. Instagram is their non-volatile memory, in this case.) For these groups, having a Facebook is "uncool" and "for old people".
I don't know if it'll survive, but I love it to death. I'd be willing to pony up a buck to keep it around.
- clarky07 11y agoYou say that, but the article states that 70% of teens use facebook vs. 40% for snapchat. I'm not sure a service with a billion users can really be labeled uncool by that many people.
- striking 11y agoI really am focusing on the social elite of a small group of kids that I met over the summer. They're from California and I live on the East Coast (where Facebook is the norm). I'll be the first to admit that the plural of anecdote is not data. Which is why I said "some groups of people." In any case, I think the difference in user population is because of accessibility to technology. Snapchat basically demands a swanky, whiz-bang phone, which not all kids have. I'd be willing to bet that more than 30% of kids (the difference in the statistics) lack a Snapchat-capable phone. Being rich is cool, so apparently Snapchat is too. And it's cooler than Facebook, making Facebook uncool. I understand that there are a long list of logical fallacies in this section but hey, we're teens.