Brands fed up with the instability at Twitter may flock to Meta’s new offering

Archive link

  • Toxic_Tiger@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    1 year ago

    I would rather not have Zuckerberg controlling more social platforms, but at the same time I really want Musk to crash and burn.

  • 0xtero@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    Rich business dudes threatening other rich business dudes with… business.

    There’s not much “technology” in there.

  • beefcat@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    I never thought I’d say this but Zuckerberg is the lesser of two evils. I don’t necessarily hope Threads is a huge success, but I will be quietly happy if it manages to drive the final nail into Twitter’s coffin just to teach the Muskrat a lesson.

  • Dusty@lemmy.dustybeer.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    Zuckerberg’s company is already courting celebrities and influencers to test the app.

    Even if it was someone other than Zuckerberg doing this, reading this bit would immediately turn me off to the platform.

    I guess I’m old enough to have gone through they heyday of the internet at an impressionable time in my life, but I have zero time for influencers or opinions by celebrities on literally anything.

      • gk99@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes they are. Facebook’s audience is as many people as possible, because their business is advertising based on collected data. They would ideally want literally everyone on the platform, but this is the real world and lowest common denominator makes more sense from a business standpoint.

        Edit: Getting celebrities and influencers on-board is basically a requirement to get the average person to care, because they’re not on the platform to follow other average people.

  • maat@lemmy.maatwo.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    The fact that instagram users can migrate their accounts to Threads (presumably with very little configuration) is huge. I don’t feel like it would impact this side of the internet as much but twitter could look like a very different place a year from now. Doubt they’ll be trying to federate.

  • ericjmorey@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Interesting that Twitter is becoming more of a walled garden and the biggest walled garden is looking to create a lesser walled garden.

  • lixus98@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Meta’s incursion in the fediverse might cause very bad effects, there’s nothing preventing them from spitting add from their new platform to all other platforms compatible with it.
    I really hope that if we come to that, admins will defederate immediately.

        • FaceDeer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Then those instances will get defederated right along with Meta itself.

          Ultimately, there’s very little friction for users when it comes to choosing which instance they want to “view” the Fediverse from, so if some of them are ad-laden and others are not they’ll gravitate to the non-ad-laden ones. This will be especially easy once account migration features get implemented.

          • Hellsadvocate@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yeah this is the thing about the fediverse. As long as you can defederate there will always be an instance willing to provide that niche

          • cavemeat@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            That is true, the nature of the fediverse does mean that you won’t have to interact with fedbook’s server if you don’t want to.

  • Heresy_generator@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    They’re going to quickly realize they’re already reaching that audience via Facebook; the people using this service will be the same people.

    • Untitled9999@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      They might keep those users more engaged with this new app though. The Twitter format might be more successful for facilitating outrage and arguments than the Facebook format is.

      And more engagement means more adverts shown and thus more revenue.

  • Clairvoidance@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Advertisers are likely to be much more willing to bank their ad dollars with Zuckerberg than smaller rivals.

    I’m fine with any most thing that shows you cannot enable harm-to-discourse as much as Musk has. I would sooner them come to Zuckerberg than crawling back to Twitter because it didn’t have an alternative. Twitter is very much a walking corpse right now, but something else coming along to snatch the could-be advertisers secure that it can stay in its fucking pit. (unless various sus governments still somehow see use in keeping it propped up)

      • Clairvoidance@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Well I think it’s kinda hard to imagine a free service that doesn’t do either data collection or advertising (read: you are the product), with advertising it makes sense through being a more openly a field that has a lot of money circulating around it, and while I don’t think the average person cares about data collection to the point where they’ll ignore products that do it, it at least serves as bad publicity

        The only other viable model I can personally think of is subscriptions, I find it hard to imagine that only forcing big corporations to pay to use your service, or that having it be donationbased would work with the amount of manpower and serverspace these products from within Silicon Valley typically host that need a lot of money every month until they stop existing

        • SkepticElliptic@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          All of the automotive forums I ever used did make their money from advertising, BUT it was relevant advertising. Either it was sponsored by a vendor that specialized in that platform (ipdusa.com) or outright owned by a vendor (modernperformance.com)

          These vendors also sold products that the users inherently wanted to buy and discuss. It was a symbiotic relationship. The discussion forum facilitated the business by allowing users to discuss their interest in an automotive platform.

          • beefcat@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That is easier to do when your community covers some particular niche. That effectively does the ad targeting for you. An auto parts store knows that most people in a forum about car repair might actually be interested in their product.

            It’s harder with a more general purpose community like Facebook or Twitter. Most people on these platforms probably have no interest in auto parts. A good chunk of them might not even own cars at all. Initially, this meant that impressions sold in these spaces were dirt cheap, because they so rarely converted into clicks. This is where data collection comes in, because it allows your advertisers to actually narrow the focus of their ad campaigns to users that might actually be relevant. And the more data Facebook has on you, the more detailed and effective these campaigns can become.