Sorry, we could not find the combination you entered »
Please enter your email and we will send you an email where you can pick a new password.
Reset password:
 

executive

 
Executive Report - By Thomas Baekdal - July 2013

Should You Be in Control of Your Social Streams?

A couple of days ago I noticed that Google+ had started adding posts that my friends had +1'd to my stream. This is problematic for so many reasons, so I shared the post below on Google+, with which people both agreed and disagreed.

And this opened a much bigger discussion about who should be in control of your stream. I will discuss why this is important in this article, but first take a read of my post.

--

Get your freaking +1s out of my stream...

If you ask people what they find most annoying about Facebook, it's lack of relevancy. Especially in the early years when every time a friend of yours liked or interacted with something, you would see that in your stream (and you still mostly do).

For instance, a friend of yours would like a picture of one of their friends newborn baby, which would then show up in your stream. But you don't care about a picture of someone's baby when you have no idea who they are.

What Facebook failed to understand was the difference between a like and a share. A like is a thumbs up. A way for you to say that this was valuable to you as an individual.

A share, however, is much more. It's when something is both valuable to you as an individual and to your friends.

In other words, a like is a way for me to say that this is great, but it's not relevant to other people around me. So let's keep this between us. Whereas a share is saying this is great and it is relevant to everyone else as well. Let's spread it!

It's a very simple concept that Facebook has never understood, and one of the reasons why we like Google+ today.

But today I am starting to see other people's +1s in my stream. Below, for instance, is one from +Visnja Zeljeznjak (who BTW is a great person).

But when Visjna +1'd this post, she said: "I like that post, but it's NOT RELEVANT for my followers". To which Google+ is now saying "Screw you, Visnja. We are going to share it anyway because we want to boost our engagement stats."

This is Facebook all over again. Facebook never understood that when we decide not to share something, that post should never show up in other people's streams.

Google+ I love you guys. I think Google+ is the best social network that we have. But stop making it worse. First, by changing the format (and deemphasizing in-post links) which made it almost useless for longer posts like this one. Then by adding auto-awesome which turned our stream into a constantly blinking animated gif, and now by adding posts to my stream that other people have decided not to share.

Google, we expect you to be better than this. If we want crap and irrelevant posts in our streams, there are plenty of other places that we can go.

We love Google+ because of the value it creates, not the noise!

--

You might agree or disagree with my post, but that's not really what's interesting. What's interesting is why you might agree or disagree.

When it comes to information, we have always had two different forms of content:

  1. Content that we decided to consume, when we wanted to consume it, and how we wanted to consume it.
  2. Content that others decided that we could consume, when and how we could consume it.

Think of Spotify versus Radio. With Spotify, you decide what music to listen to. You decide when to listen to it, where to listen, and in most cases also how to listen to it. You are always in control.

With radio, however, you can only decide when to listen to the radio as a whole, but you don't control what you are going to hear, or when a specific song is played. You have no control over what is being presented to you.

 
This 15 page report is exclusive for subscribers. (login)

Subscribe now to get full access to this Baekdal/Executive report

This Baekdal/Executive article can only accessed bysubscribing to Baekdal/Executive (which also gives you full access to our full archieve of executive reports)

What is Baekdal?

Baekdal is a magazine for media professionals, focusing on media analysis, trends, patterns, strategy, journalistic focus, and newsroom optimization. Since 2010, it has helped publishers in more than 40 countries, including big and small publishers like Condé Nast, Bonnier, Schibsted, NRC, and others, as well as companies like Google and Microsoft.

Baekdal comes in three tiers:

Baekdal/Basic

Free weekly newsletters for media professionals, focusing on news, trends, and quick insights.


Baekdal/Plus

Weekly media insights and analysis for journalists, editors, and business managers, helping you focus and optimize your newsroom and audience engagement.


Baekdal/Executive

In-depth media reports for editors-in-chief, executives, and other decision makers, helping you understand the future of media, trends, patterns, monetization, data, and strategies.

 
 
 

The Baekdal/Basic Newsletter is the best way to be notified about the latest media reports, but it also comes with extra insights.

Get the newsletter

Thomas Baekdal

Founder, media analyst, author, and publisher. Follow on Twitter

"Thomas Baekdal is one of Scandinavia's most sought-after experts in the digitization of media companies. He has made ​​himself known for his analysis of how digitization has changed the way we consume media."
Swedish business magazine, Resumé

 

—   thoughts   —

executive

thoughts:
Why publishers who try to innovate always end up doing the same as always

executive

thoughts:
A guide to using editorial analytics to define your newsroom

free

thoughts:
What do I mean when I talk about privacy and tracking?

executive

thoughts:
Let's talk about Google's 'cookie-less' future and why it's bad

free

thoughts:
I'm not impressed by the Guardian's OpenAI GPT-3 article

free

thoughts:
Should media be tax exempt?