My reply to Om’s Malik’s post.
I (mostly) agree with Om’s headline, but not with the assertions nor the conclusion; in no small part because the various platforms differ and there’s one big segment of Social which his post doesn’t touch on at all: Messaging.
- Twitter: I was on very early and effectively off it a long time ago. The same has been true for Threads, which unravelled (pun intended) for me pretty quickly. I start here because there’s something inherently flawed with this type of platform, as you’ve highlighted. They seem designed to bring out the worst in people.
- Facebook & LinkedIn: Both have strayed very far from their original premises, both have done so very successfully (from a commercial POV), and both remain core parts of a huge number of people’s daily online experience (existence?). They clearly still fill a need for people that hasn’t been met elsewhere.
- Instagram: It has also strayed from it’s original premise, also very successfully. However, it’s worth treating it separately as several key early decisions differentiate it from every other platform, notably around linking out to other platforms/the web. Originally it was link in bio, then swipe up in Stories for people over a certain follower threshold, then shopping stickers on posts & Stories, then link stickers in Stories for everyone and most recently multiple links in bio, and hooks into WhatsApp (both organic and paid). Links in posts still not a thing. This meant that Instagram stayed mostly self contained and that news most stayed off it, making it…different and it’s own thing. Another key decision was a flat graph in which people, businesses, celebrities all had a the same type of profile (no distinction between profiles <> pages, like there is on Facebook and LinkedIn). Features were added over time but this also shaped the platform in a fundamental way: it never really was about you and your friends (unless you really wanted it to be, hence, Finstas), and so it also really wasn’t…social.
- YouTube: they don’t get enough credit for elegantly side-stepping the thorniest parts of Social. Simple, yet consequential, design decisions to hide dislike counts, put comments a click/tap away and invest heavily in trust & safety/moderation has made what was once the emblem of the worst of comments sections into something that can be avoided entirely if you want to (I do) or engaged with on your own terms. Arguably it’s barely even explicitly Social anymore, with all of the signal becoming implicit ways in which personalization is powered. Perhaps an example for other platforms.
- Glass: I include this as it’s one that Om and I are both on and it’s an example of the latest emerging wave of vertical social networks with an ad-free subscription based model. Because we’re all there for the same thing (a shared interest in photography), we’re all really nice to each other (constructive criticism is about as boundary pushing as it gets). This is a good thing but like every other app with a follower/following model and a news feed it’s going to reach a point where some sort of mediation of the flow of updates will be needed.
I’ve left out TikTok because I don’t use it or know enough about it, and Snapchat because it’s stayed relatively niche.
BeReal briefly emerged and then flamed out, leaving behind the idea of using the notification layer for…something more than just notifications.
I said that I agreed with Om’s headline and I do. Of all of the platforms above I now only regularly spend any time on YouTube and Glass, though the latter is declining. Instagram was the last of the others: it’s now primarily a messaging app for me…which…brings me to Messaging.
This is where Social has gone, is alive…thriving. 1:1 message threads and group chats. WhatsApp, iMessage, Slack, Messenger, Work Chat, Signal, Telegram, Instagram DM, Snapchat: all co-exist.
Meta is again the largest player here, even Signal is it’s beneficiary.
However, none of the players have really figured out monetization. Apple subsidizes iMessage with hardware and services revenue. Snapchat has tried to build revenue lines from other sections of the app. Messenger has ads, WhatsApp is building a “for business” business and Instagram is…well, Instagram.
And so maybe…this is what we’re left with: public facing apps with an ads model which are more like entertainment channels which fund 1:1 and small group messaging apps which are which put the “S” in Social.
Is that the worst outcome?