Everyone complains, social-media edition

[drwex]

Here's the problem:

FB is read-only. I don't want anything of mine up there because I don't want FB-the-company getting its paws on it. Thing 1 recently got his own FB page (mostly so he can get in-game bonuses for clicking "Like" buttons) and we had to explain to him that whatever he puts up there does not belong to him, it belongs to that company. We talked about some of the things that company does with stuff people put there.

That said, I rarely ever read FB in about the same way I never get a hamburger at McDonald's. I could. It wouldn't kill me. I'd get something out of it (like knowing what the heck my brother is up to) but the concept is nauseating.

Google+ is write-only. I cannot bear to try reading there because they've made the UI so hostile to textual discussion, and made the reading stream so impossible to control. I find I'm not motivated to write there in part because I'm not reading and I have broadcast media available to me, like my blog and this LJ. I do get notifications sent to me when certain people post there, so I can try to have discussions with them but discussions don't seem to happen. Perhaps others feel hampered by the UI as well?

And then there's LJ, which everyone complains about being barren and uninteresting. People forget to post here, forget to read here, and the activity level spirals down. It's the easiest medium to write for (for me) and the one that gives me the most control over my reading. I'd like to be able to have discussions here but few people respond to my posts. So there's that.

Maybe I should try Pinstagrawhatever. Or just yell at those damned kids on my lawn some more.

Comments

[goddessfarmer.livejournal.com]

I FB, but like you said, they own everything and nothing is private, but it's actually a decent way to disseminate sound bites to people who want to know. And, oddly, one of the ways I keep track of the kids, both the daughter and step-boys being adults now.

I don't G+, I know people who do, but when I was first introduced it became the one thing too many, and I didn't bother to keep up.

I do like LJ. My friends (like you) who post here, tend to post interesting and informative information that I generally am interested in. I want to know how you are really doing, which is not something that goes well on fb.

[gosling.livejournal.com]

I read everything you write on lj, and whatever Facebook deigns to show me there. I am glad you are writing on lj.

[sariel-t.livejournal.com]

This.

[drwex]

Thanks for the compliments. It seems unquestionably true that our generation/social group regards FB as lightweight fluff, but I don't think that's how the majority of its users see it.

[donnad.livejournal.com]

I am with you on most of this.

I use FB only to keep up with people, family etc. Or to whine. Family is over on FB, but not here on LJ.

I always come to LJ first, it's my default, but most of the time nobody is here anymore. Some days there are no new posts over more than 24 hours. FWIW I read everything even if I don't comment. I tend not to post too much, It seems little of what I have to generates discussion beyond people arguing with me or telling me my opinions are "WRONG". So I don't post anything of real substance publically anymore. And I wont comment unless I have something to say. I'm just not a person to type *hugs* at every post.

I never liked the UI over at G+, I have an account but never use it. I tried to login to DW recently but it's been so long that couldn't remember my password, so after a few ties, they locked the account so I can't get in at all even with the right password. So that's a bust.

So just to let you know that I too am still here on LJ, still reading, occasionally still posting when I have stuff to say. But there hasnt been much to say lately.

[gosling.livejournal.com]

I read everything you write and am glad you are posting.

[drwex]

I would be happy to hear your comments even when they are short.

[donnad.livejournal.com]

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind.

[gosling.livejournal.com]

I am so with you on this also. I love lj, and read it regularly. (I read everything you post BTW, and am glad to read it.) I rarely comment much on anyone's posts, but that is because I have too many child-driven interruptions and am apparently perpetually late and always running out of time. I often have a reply in my head I never get around to writing. This is even more true for posting updates of my own.

I greatly dislike Facebook for the reasons you list. I read it some anyway, because increasingly it is the only way I hear about what is going on with many people I like a great deal and often the only way to hear about something last minute and/or receive invitations I am happy to have. Then I find I dislike Facebook by several orders of magnitude more, because it doesn't even actually work well for that at all. Time critical posts and invitations seem to regularly fail to appear in a useful timeframe or at all. I don't post there, although I will occasionally comment.

G+ I read and comment on occasionally, although I don't post there either. (The UI works ok for me, although it was *much* more readable before.)

[drwex]

Thank you. It's good to know that people are reading. I certainly understand the interrupts. I've discovered that LJ and the browser are pretty good at keeping track of posts or comments as I'm composing them. It does lose occasionally, but I'll often leave a window open and just return to it now and then as I have a moment to work on what I'm writing.

[aelf.livejournal.com]

I have a similar experience. One of the things I run into with LJ is many people only post privately. It means I'm unlikely to easily add new people to interact with & I don't think my experience of that is unusual.

Facebook is where I post things for relatives. I'm unlikely to think about anything there. It's pretty much "Oh look, I have a kid and she does stuff."

G+ I only use for reading, and very irregularly.

Pinterest is personal. I'm connected with a few folks there but it's not a social thing. It's a "things I'd like to do" thing, and I could be your very best bosom buddy but if we don't share crafting/whatever interests, I'm not interested in you on pinterest.

I don't take or think in pictures, so tumblr et al are not for me! :)

[marius23.livejournal.com]

I still read and comment on LJ. I have a more substantive comment to make but insufficient time at the moment. Will try to get to it later.

[drwex]

Looking forward to it.

[davidfcooper.livejournal.com]

Most of my LJ friends have migrated to FB. I use FB to keep in touch with friends and relatives and to share links. i find both FB and G+ so visual oriented as to be text unfriendly, though i use both to share links to my book reviews (http://nyjournalofbooks.com/reviewer/david-cooper). i find Tumblr has a better mix of text and visuals and also serves as a reader since many periodicals have an active presence there.

[dreams-of-wings.livejournal.com]

I'm trying to get back in the habit of using LJ like I used to because I do love it, as far as social media goes – by far my favorite method of communication with people.
Finding the time to write is just so damn hard for me right now, but I'm hoping that will be less true soon.

[drwex]

Your writing is always thought-provoking. I'm sorry I haven't had time myself to engage more fully with it.

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

For me, FB is too noisy (ad-laden). G+ is irrelevant. Tumblr and Pinterest I haven't found uses for.

I post to dw and crosspost to LJ. Most of the resulting comments arrive here at LJ.

I'm actually reasonably pleased at my readership here. There are literate, thoughtful comments and posts. I doubt I would get that if I posted the same content to FB.

[drwex]

I agree, but I think that's a function of our small bubble. Maybe that's all that matters, but in that case I have interest in keeping the bubble from popping.

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

I look at it slightly differently. I think that the format of LJ and dw has encouraged a certain type of communication. I like that kind of communication, and I'm ok with the social networking ecosystem having filtered out the people who weren't interested in having that kind of conversation. The size of the bubble doesn't matter as much as its nature.

I'm interested in your thoughts on how that bubble may pop. In my own journal things seem reasonably stable and have seemed so since the mass exodus to FB.

[drwex]

Unlike physical communities, which tend to persist, social communities - particularly online - depend on critical masses. As I noted in the original post, LJ has gotten an air of "nobody comes here so why should I come here and nobody posts/reads/comments my stuff so why should I put it here?" That has the potential to cycle in a feedback loop of self-fulfillment. But since critical mass is uncertain it's easy to see what looks like a dribble of people drifting away and then turn around one day to find that it (the community/the bubble) is gone.

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

Ok, yeah. I think my bubble here is different from yours as mine looks pretty stable. I.e., there was some a big exodus a while ago but the ones who are here now appear to be here to stay. To take one example, the fic bloggers in my circle appear pretty entrenched here, and they are a significant subset of my commenters. (Most of them maintain separate fic blog accounts from the accounts which they use to comment in my journal.)

I do occasionally hear about people saying "nobody comes here so why should I come here and nobody posts/reads/comments my stuff so why should I put it here?" but while the people reporting this (like you) are in my direct circle I don't see it from anyone in my immediate friends so I can't figure out who they are. We obviously have overlap in our circles but equally obviously the people who are saying that aren't in our overlap.

Could you characterize what group of your circle is saying that nobody comes to LJ anymore? (As I said, the fic bloggers appear to be the reverse of that group.) I understand if you can't or shouldn't; I'm just curious about whether there's a way to describe those who are in the "nobody comes here" group.

I also understand that these things ramify; it's certainly possible that there will be sufficient negative network effects to start affecting my friends directly, or even close LJ from lack of use, but I'm not seeing it from where I sit and I'm interested in understanding where the decay might be coming from.

[drwex]

The people whom I most notice saying this are people who I only tend to see at infrequent social events (say, 1-5x/year) and whose lives I used to keep up on via their LJ posts.

[make-your-move.livejournal.com]

Still here, still reading -- still plan on posting more and haven't gotten around to it.

Don't go anywhere -- you know I'd just have to find you and stalk you :)

[drwex]

I'm not sure which direction you're trying to encourage me toward...

[celticdragonfly.livejournal.com]

I still read here. I need to remember to write here more often.

[mizarchivist]

I do find G+'s interface to be entirely unhelpful and uninteresting. I do scan FB more than not and I post things there that are milquetoast. LJ's for actual content. And now I have twitter for my news source, both standard issue and professional.

[drwex]

Interesting choice of icons, neh?

[mizarchivist]

It's always gratifying to be able to use just the right one to add to one's statement.

[hammercock.livejournal.com]

I still read regularly, yet have not been writing/commenting nearly as much because of being a bear of very little sleep (and therefore very little brain). I've been trying to remedy this lately, though.

FB is easy to post to from my phone, and lends itself well to snarky one-liners, link sharing, and keeping family and friends updated on Xander. However, LJ is where I put deeper and more personal thoughts.

[drwex]

Your posts are often about family/kid-raising and I find myself sympathizing but not inclined to write much else as it can too easily tend into "telling other people how to parent their kids" which is Just Not Done, as best I can manage it.

[hammercock.livejournal.com]

Fair enough. :-}

And now, of course, I have opportunities to rant about the stupidity of the GOP, so you can always feel free to join in there. *smirk*

[chienne-folle.livejournal.com]

I go to Facebook once a year, if that. I have an account there only because my husband insisted, and I hate it there. I sometimes think about going there to see the pictures that one of my dearest friends posts there, but I never manage to actually make it there. So yeah, I hear you about Facebook.

I tried Google Plus in the beginning, but it just didn't feel right, and I keep forgetting that it actually exists.

I'm glad to have you here on LJ; I feel as if people like you, who actually post thoughtful and interesting things here, are anchoring this place. I'm hoping that you'll lead a movement back here from the other social media places. Hey, I can dream. :-)

[drwex]

Oy. The last thing I need is to be in charge of something else. =P

[dcltdw]

I blather on fb, but it's carefully at a level where I don't mind if my employer sees it, because I assume fb's security means that everyone can see it. Or it'll be sold to them.

I post actual content here. It's just that, lately, I haven't been doing anything interesting. Not a whinge; it's just that I've settled into a routine recently, and updates of the form "ayup, still doing that" aren't lj-worthy. They are great fb fodder, though.

Actually, fb is also used for social infection. I'm much more vocal about, say, gender equality than I am here. My readers here already agree with me. Over on fb, I can challenge the fringe of my readership: "no, I won't back you up on this". It's slightly amusing to me how I've lost a few readers over this, but I'm a bad person that way.

[sandhawke.livejournal.com]

*waving from the neighboring lawn* (and scheming how to improve the situation)

[drwex]

I'd be interested in how you think things can be improved. I have the nagging feeling that there's an innate technological component to a solution, but it's not _the_ solution. My current analogy is "cars are not the solution to bad driving, but you can't possibly talk about making driving better if you ignore cars."

[sandhawke.livejournal.com]

Well, my longstanding thesis is that lots of coders would happily write code which actually respects the users' rights and freedom, if it weren't so damn hard to so. It's usually: I've got to get this working, and I don't really know how to do it in a really open way, so I guess I'll have to make it closed. Sorry you're trapped, users, but I mean well. Honest.

So my proposed solution is to provide off-the-shelf openness/interoperability/user-freedom. See crosscloud.org.

Then we'll have a 1000 facebooks blooming (all interoperating at the data level, so we can communicate even if we're not using the same one), and there will be some nice UIs, and maybe some user pressure in a good direction on policies, since the users actually have a choice.

Of course, this is very complicated; I'm glossing a lot. I'd be interested in getting into the details with you in person some time, either before or after I have a working demo.

[drwex]

It's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure it would have a large impact. In effect Dreamwidth are trying this - they're essentially 100% interoperable with LJ, but their uptake is tiny and not sustaining of a significant effort. Even if coders would write for free the storage and bandwidth cost money and that introduces particularization since the way you make money is generally off users (fees, microtransactions, donations, ads). This makes the UI much more important since the UI is your life-sustaining revenue source.

[sandhawke.livejournal.com]

Perhaps I should be following the dreamwidth thing. My impression was there was still a lot of friction, and that the social networks were distinct, so I couldn't switch to dreamwidth while keeping all my friend connections working fine. Is it actually smoother than that, so I can post to dreamwidth one week and lj another week and no one else will be impacted at all?

For the business model, I think of there being an internal market, all inside what's traditionally been 'the application'. There are costs in various places, value being created in various places, and various folks willing to pay for something. For example, the UI could show ads and use some of the ad revenue to pay the storage providers. Or users could pay for their storage and see fewer/no ads. Or the content provider might subsidize storage, bandwidth, and UI (perhaps because of product placements or something).

So, the large impact depends on a few factors, like (1) will the technology actually work well enough, (2) are there a enough developers willing to give up on the own-your-users business models, and (3) are users willing to migrate and in some cases pay in order to have more freedom and control?

My wild-ass estimate of the odds are 50%, 80%, and 75% respectively. Sounds pretty good to me, given the payoff.

[drwex]

I believe the DW/LJ connection works as you describe, mostly. It's my understanding that DW doesn't see posts from LJ, but you can push your DW posts to LJ. The reason being that DW invokes the LJ posting API the way an app would, if you configure it that way, but LJ doesn't invoke DW's API.

There has also been some move by FB recently to cross-pollinate with other social networks, but I don't follow or use FB enough to know more.

[sandhawke.livejournal.com]

Would it make you happy if FB got that stuff all working right, so you could use whatever UI you liked the feel of, and be getting a feed from FB, G+, Twitter, etc, all filtered however you told your UI? And when you posted, it was available to all the people you wanted it available to, regardless of the social platform they were using?

There are lots of little steps in that direction. Lots of sites (like LJ) let you post to multiple sites at once (but I never do that.) And there are various UIs that log in to all your social media and present an integrated view (but I never use them). Have you tried them? Why don't they solve your problem....?

[drwex]

I think there's a significant difference between "would it make you happy if FB..." and "would you like to see..."

The former, no. I don't care for the company or it's business model and I probably would be unhappy using its services if it was selling dollar bills for 90 cents. Would I like to see a good UI that coalesces all sorts of social media? Probably? My experience with Google+ is that attempts to mash up many sorts of media in a UI result in an unusable mess. I lean right now toward the belief that - for example - text-rich UIs such as this one are not fundamentally compatible with pictorial UIs such as photo-albums. I have not used pinterest nor tumblr, both of which attempt to give people the chance to mix media, so I reserve judgment on it. But the examples I've seen of others' have not been convincing or encouraging.

So in summary I think there are two issues: one is the policies and procedures of the hosting company, and then there are fundamentally unsolved mechanics of media presentation/interaction. Each can be worked independently, but solving one is not a solution to the other.

[c1.livejournal.com]

I'm going to toss my vote into the hat for "Keep yelling at those damn kids on your lawn some more."