Is Facebook’s redesign aimed at Silicon Valley, not everywhere else?

Facebook has finally started integrating its new redesign into its main site. The company is betting that what users want to do is publish more information about themselves, and see more about their friends activities. The thing is, do most Facebook users actually want to do those things?

There’s a large school of thought in the Facebook application developer community that believes the majority of Facebook users actually like to do what most MySpace users also do — express themselves. And by that I mean decorate their user profiles with glittery slideshows, quizzes, lists of favorite bands, and plenty of other features that both MySpace and the old Facebook profile offered, that the new Facebook design de-emphasizes. Developer Stanislav Shalunov wrote perhaps the best thought piece on this reality, a month ago. As he puts, it there are two types of users:

Giggly 75% like pokes, quizzes, pic forwarding, fun games, selling friends, glitter on profiles. They express themselves through style and interact with friends using the mouse

Serious 25% like bookmark import, utility apps, discussions. They express themselves with text and pictures containing them and interact with friends using the keyboard. Because you’re reading this, and made it this far, you’re serious. (Giggly users tend to not read much at all, certainly not blobs of text, and quite certainly not my blog)

That’s the thing. Here in Silicon Valley, we’re minimalist snobs about decor. You don’t see many pink flamingoes in the front yards of Palo Alto Eichlers or San Francisco Victorians. I’ve personally deleted every tacky-looking application from my profile page after installing it, just so I could keep my profile looking “clean.”

Facebook’s new design, as many of us have been noting since the company began testing it months ago, seems to emphasis features also seen in trendy new web services favored by us self-styled “early adopter” types. While Facebook offered status updates before messaging service Twitter existed, Facebook now features a box at the top of its users’ profile pages that asks each user to broadcast what they’re doing — similar to Twitter. Facebook also just launched an iPhone application built around its status message service, not its more general profile features.
While Facebook offered news feeds of your and friends’ activity on the site before FriendFeed existed, Facebook’s homepage now highlights the “news feed” of friend activity and profile pages of each person’s “mini-feed” of activity. What’s more, while FriendFeed has always offered ways to let you automatically import your actions on other sites, Facebook has been working on this, too. So when you post photos to Flickr or vote on a story on Digg, those actions can appear in FriendFeed — and now Facebook. Facebook also recently added the ability to comment on feed items. One of the features that makes FriendFeed popular.

In fact, many “early adopters” have been gleefully speculating that Twitter and Friendfeed will eventually kill Facebook because those services more openly enable the flow of information between other sites and their own.

Maybe Facebook employees should stop reading us Silicon Valley blogs, and our constant chatter about Twitter and Friendfeed.

Facebook employees have been pondering why only a fraction of its users don’t seem to actually share that many links to other web sites using its “share” feature. The new profile seems to confront this perceived problem.

The new profile emphasizes sharing by making the options to share photos, videos, notes and links really obvious — at the top of “news” feeds and right above the Twitter-like status update box on the profile mini-feeds.

Clearly, Facebook thinks that if it forces users to share stuff, then they’ll really start sharing stuff. I wouldn’t be surprised if Facebook product managers are thinking “phew, now we’ve cut off the threat of Twitter and Friendfeed taking our users!”

So where does this leave us? I’ve long argued that the value of Facebook is in the fact that it has convinced millions to share real information about themselves — versus the fake information you see on MySpace and many other social networks. But the thing is, it seems Facebook users want to share real information along the lines of glittery photos.

It wouldn’t surprise me if Facebook sees a sustained protest from millions of users who don’t care about publishing, in the first place, who just want to decorate their profiles to show off to their friends. After all, the redesign seems to require a tour for many people, as Svetlana Gladkova notes over at Profy. Maybe, though, Facebook can educate the masses on the joys of publishing.
Bookmark and Share
Photo of Eric Eldon

About the Author, Eric Eldon

Eric currently covers digital media technology and business, especially what's happening on social networks and their platforms. He writes and edits stories about lots of other stuff, too. He started at VentureBeat in the spring of 2007, half a year or so after Matt Marshall left his reporting job at the San Jose Mercury News to found the site. Eric previously cofounded a now-failed startup called Writewith, that was building editorial software for newspapers and other groups of writers.

  • A very well written and thought provoking article. However, I would point out that if you look at almost every online/tech-supported behaviour, you generally find that the characteristics of early-adopters and mainstream aren't really that different (although many early adopters like to think they are). The main difference is that early adopters are willing to use the new technologies before they're easy to use.

    If you look at the internet, blogs, social networks - all of these tools and technologies were around for years before they went mainstream. What made them go mainstream? It wasn't a change in behaviour; it was a change in the technology which made these easy to do.

    SO - yeah, currently many of the the behaviours regarding sharing of content etc is only carried out by early adopters - but that's just because they're ahead of the curve in the technology that allows them to do that, not because they're more prone to sharing than others, or somehow 'more serious' (as though the only serious people in the world are early tech adopters). Millions of people use Facebook, and they've just made it easy to share content - so could be a big step-change about to happen.
  • Eric -

    nice piece, however, i don't think profile-bling "self-expression" and "river of news about me" news feed info are mutually exclusive content options / trends... just because MySpace emphasizes the former and Facebook emphasizes the latter, doesn't mean that they both aren't zeroing in on respective designs that combine both approaches.

    in the future, i bet you'll see both sites/services combining elements of each... as will LinkedIn, Google, and other services as well (in varying degrees)
  • Dave, they certainly aren't mutually exclusive. What I'm trying to say is that Facebook's old design was more of a blend of river+bling and the new design focuses so much on the river that it potentially cuts the majority of users off from the bling they love.

    That's it. I'm starting a social network called MyFace and the main feature is going to be something called the Bling River.
  • I have a lot of college-aged friends that, even though the too participate in the 'bling river', very much find it annoying and un-navigable from a usability standpoint.

    With all that money Fbook has, I'm sure they've spent quite a bit of time/money on usability testing & research to find out what people really want -- which I believe is just photos and news and interaction with friends -- at the end of the day, everything else is just icing (i.e. bling river).
  • Eric, I do agree with you to a certain extent. It's interesting - although not surprising, given the changes Facebook has made previous to this big overhaul - that they'd choose to go in the Twitter/status update direction rather than staying with the slightly more "permanent" profile that saw so much success. For me the point of Facebook is a profile I update once in a while, and I never update my Facebook status - for that I go to Twitter. And having just briefly looked at the new design, although I for one am happy not to have to scroll through a million apps on every profile, I do feel like hey, it's your profile, do what you want - and the new version allows for less customization of how your profile looks.

    I don't think Twitter or Friendfeed will kill Facebook, nor do I think that by changing Facebook will kill the others. They're different, and I'd like them to stay that way!
  • Aimed at advertisers/revenue as well. Used to be mostly one ad on left, now ads moved to right, and sometimes two ads being displayed. Brand new ad space on home page also - to the right of the news feed.
  • I suppose it depends on which demographic they're going after. There's a middle slice of users somewhere between Myspacer's and bloggers, perhaps they're trying to hit that sweet middle spot.

    The only danger in that being that if that demographic upgrades to full-fledged blogs at some point that slice of users might dwindle. Or grow, hard to say :)
  • Interesting take Eric.

    I suspect a lot of the "Giggly vs Serious" split is an age think. FB started out as a social network for college kids, with high school kids right behind. As Danah Boyd's pointed out (and as I see anecdotally) it's close to the only social network used by college-bound middle and upper middle class high school kids who tend to like those giggle apps that seem aimed at 15 year olds.

    We adults came on afterwards, when we discovered that the clean interface was actually fine for things like sharing links and self-promotion, provided you put the right privacy settings on certain photos.

    And while Twitter is now mostly used to share links to sites like this, I often wonder if we'll soon see it (or the FB status update) used to link to PerezHilton or Us magazine.

    Until then, you're right in thinking that FB's new redesign seems to favor the more adult audience. Whether that's what we in the ad industry call "NASCAR Blindness" (e.g. the thought pattern that says "No one I know does this, ergo no one does") or a conscious decision to go after that demo remains to be seen.
  • Perry
    Perhaps FB feels the need to focus on reinforcing their core identity. Twitter/FF are showing tremendous momentum (yes, on a small scale, as with any new product) building deep engagement on the fundamental status and sharing model. FB really achieved scale on the backs of the status and feed concept on top of the personal profile publishing (it's developers who added the bling).

    My guess is they need to find a deeper level of daily/hourly involvement, which is being proven in TW/FF to win on engagement. The more usage you have, the more you can engage the bling and apps crowd - they will always follow the audience.

    Perhaps it's more of a "first things first" approach, not an a vs. b.

    my $0.02
  • Maybe we're starting to see an evolution in Social Media usage? Could Segmenting in a serious way be taking place? Shalunov seems to have hit on something...Perhaps Facebook will be a more, uhm, conservative approach? Behavioural targeting anyone?
  • PanchoPepe
    Seriously... show of hands for those whose browsers would lock up while trying to get in touch with others in the "flat" single page layout?... it was great with a few of THEIR apps... but once the world came in and loaded ... with RAW code (it ain't even worth thinking of it as Betas, that's how bad some of these applets were) some pages? did anyone notice the amount of image fragments? and just plain indigestions with the Java Runtime and what not???

    So I think they did the right thing; you want your stuff, put it where it belongs, if you're just stopping by to say hi, poke or otherwise write asinine comments on people's status-es, you do it and you're gone!... so you can go to your next victim... I mean, "friend"...

    Ciao!!!
  • PanchoPepe
    Seriously... show of hands for those whose browsers would lock up while trying to get in touch with others in the "flat" single page layout?... it was great with a few of THEIR apps... but once the world came in and loaded ... with RAW code (it ain't even worth thinking of it as Betas, that's how bad some of these applets were) some pages? did anyone notice the amount of image fragments? and just plain indigestions with the Java Runtime and what not???

    So I think they did the right thing; you want your stuff, put it where it belongs, if you're just stopping by to say hi, poke or otherwise write asinine comments on people's status-es, you do it and you're gone!... so you can go to your next victim... I mean, "friend"...

    Ciao!!!
  • Does anybody in Silicon Valley use Facebook or do you people just regurgitate each others talking points? This is as clueful an analysis of Facebook's new changes as TechCrunch's "FriendFeedization of Facebook" garbage this morning.
  • Dare, I've covered the redesign extensively over the last months, which you'll see if you click on any of the links I already included in the story. Here, I step back and examine some potential issues I see.

    Since you don't like my angle, tell me why I'm wrong.

    Also, I've been using Facebook since 2005.