.
Since Facebook – or Meta if you prefer – announced the drop in the monthly number of active users, accompanied by the drop in quarterly revenues, news of a similar nature began to appear in other companies in the sector, as well as articles and articles considering the end of networks social.
Anyone who is a user of one or more has followed this type of content with some interest and/or concern, after all, will they really end?
This type of statement, which may seem exaggerated to many, has reason to be and that’s what we’re going to talk about in this article.
Why is there talk of the end of social networks?
The much talked about end of social media, whether in 2023 or beyond, is not just a matter of attracting clickbait with sensational headlines (clickbait) and therefore readers for articles that address the issue.
Yes, it’s right to say that it seems exaggerated depending on the case, but what’s behind it all has to do with recent facts and the paths taken by some of the main services of the type.
In the case of Facebook, a succession of events somehow influenced what has been observed, such as the announcement of the name change to Meta and investments and research in the metaverse.
Not that basing the social network on the metaverse concept is a bad thing, but it seemed, and especially for those less fond of technology and who perhaps did not understand the possibilities involved, a drastic change or that at least it did not meet their expectations.
It must be borne in mind that human beings are partly driven by what is comfortable and known to them, and thus, severe changes take them out of their comfort zone and can frighten some, even if until then nothing special has changed.
On the company’s side, investors have looked with skepticism and distrust at the movements commanded by Zuckerberg, which has been gradually taking on even more negative contours with the decrease in profits, with the successive loss of users, the flight of advertisers and which culminated with thousands of layoffs.
Incidentally, when it comes to cutting staff, a similar scenario has been seen in other technology companies, such as Twitter, which shortly after its purchase by Elon Musk, announced more than 11,000 layoffs.
Several other technology giants are following the same steps and downsizing their staff, which seems unrelated to social networks, as is the case with Amazon, but which in turn is a great advertiser and as we know, advertising revenue is what moves the Internet and its future directions.
There is also the issue of discussions and legislation – such as GDPR and LGPD – which aim to deal with privacy on the Internet, which are hardening and reducing the immense profits that previously came from the real spree in relation to the use of users’ personal data to move online advertising.
In practice, Apple has been leading the queue of companies aligned with these new times, announcing through its policies that it will stop tracking people’s online activity and selling this data to advertisers. She has even garnered widespread dislike for it.
Added to these facts, others of market knowledge, such as the end of consecrated networks, as was the case of Orkut and Myspace and others, such as Google+, which despite the technological support and investments, never reached the level of main.
That is, the history of social networks shows a standard behavior that has been confirmed so far. They are born, evolve and grow reasonably quickly, reaching an apex which is followed by their decline.
How long this cycle is and when it ends can vary greatly depending on each case and there is no precise answer, except that it seems inevitable to happen.
The big problem has been to keep the peak phase as long as possible, because when the decline starts, it has been shown to be irreversible, or at most to contain its momentum at least partially, for the following reasons:
- Loss of advertisers – the loss of advertisers results in an immediate reduction in revenue, which fuels updates, news and new technologies, maintenance and improvement of infrastructure and various investments. For example, in the case of Twitter, companies like Apple, Volkswagen, General Motors and Allianz, among others, suspended advertising investment in Elon Musk’s newest company;
- Users – the loss of active users, especially those who abandon to use a direct competitor, end up strengthening the competitor and reinforce the reasons for advertisers to reduce or even stop advertising on the network in decline, which ends up constituting a cycle vicious, difficult to reverse or even contain;
- Other networks – the accelerated growth of other networks represents a double impact, when it occurs from the migration of users from the old one and not because they now participate in yet another new service, in addition to the old one;
- Changes in algorithms – changes in algorithms, which are responsible for how content is presented, have been made to try to copy features from services that have stood out, as is the case with TikTok. In this way, a network can mischaracterize itself and thus lose the attraction that motivated the adhesion of the most loyal users. In practice, those who do, instead of dictating trends, just rush to follow others;
- Generations – the new generations, which have influence in determining what is a trend, are less faithful and have no attachment, if they decide that a new network serves them better or presents itself in a way that pleases them more;
- Ease – the growth of the aforementioned TikTok shows that the ease of use and consumption of content is something that pleases the user and that goes against what some metaverse experiences would require from users, such as virtual reality glasses. It seems to many that they are wanting to complicate, when what the user wants is to simplify;
- Security – the data leaks that have been reported periodically and that do not choose victims, have left users reticent and concerned. The movement to restrict the profile and everything that involves personal data is not new, and to value services that offer resources aimed at privacy and security in the digital environment;
- Disinformation – one of the driving forces of the Internet was the democratization of information, however, for some time now social networks have served as an instrument for the opposite, that is, disinformation and fake news. Social networks are facing a dilemma, since allowing or not exercising control looks like connivance and repressing looks like censorship;
- Hate speech – similarly to the previous problem, hate speech, racism, xenophobia, misogyny and related manifestations are another problem that has been gaining worrying contours and whose treatment by each company is necessary but which certainly displeases the party affected;
- “Law of the ex” – these tens of thousands of former employees who are being fired in almost all companies in the sector, carry with them various strategic information about their former companies and that can be decisive for a direct competitor or even for them create a new one themselves. By the way, this is not uncommon in the market.
Will social media really end?
At this point, it should be clear that no, social networks are not going to end, either in 2023 or even later.
What is certain is that some of those that were or still remain as leaders, at some point will see their decline and that perhaps does not mean that the company behind them also closes down its activities.
It is normal and even expected that when they see that reversing this movement is inefficient, they do what they have already done other times, that is, buy the one that threatens the leader of the segment and that has Mastodon and Koo, two possible candidates.
Ultimately, Zuckerberg and his ilk will use some of the billions already earned to stay on top, either under a new purchased network or literally destroying anyone who could grow, reinforcing how much oligopolies threaten the future of the Internet and not just the internet. social networks.
The issue is perhaps to provide answers to other questions that are more appropriate: What will be the future of social networks? Or, what are the future trends? Who will be the next to dictate the directions? Wouldn’t networks actually be antisocial? Will we have a “classic” social network again in the near future?
By the way, this last question raises a realization: since the end of Orkut, social networks are becoming less social and more anti-social, more distancing and helping to create bubbles, than having as their primary objective what the name and proposal suggest. .
Assuming from what has been the compass of the majority, the last answer is also no. Not because the new generations, who are the main thermometer of these media, do not have social interaction at the top of their priorities, after all most were born and raised constituting “friends” who are “known” only in the digital environment and following “strangers”, just because they share some commonalities.
Orkut was a network for analogue natives, but the current ones are designed only for digital natives.
Furthermore, the world’s first successful network was born as a project by one of Google’s employees and despite also demanding profit to stay alive, it was not its first and main motivation, unlike the current ones that need to show themselves. highly profitable business.
Not that there is any problem with that, but as in any area of activity, profit must be the result of business actions guided by a consistent set of policies and a customer-oriented culture, which in this business model is the user.
Conclusion
Dismissal movements, loss of active users, drop in advertising revenue and the emergence of new competitors put the future of social networks in check.
.
