Tom Cooledge

So, there are plenty of existential philosophers out there that consider an avatar – a representation of the physical self working through cyberspace on your behalf – as promising some sort of release from reality. Like Tron: Legacy (but with fewer fancy lights and less sports), having an online presence is often considered a freedom from existing boundaries by many over-thinkers.

Nevertheless there’s something quite refreshing about a social networking site that sets limits. Dubbed ‘the anti-social network’, Path has just launched as a means of sharing photos with no more than 50 people. The user’s elite set of Path ‘Friends’ are not even able to comment on their carefully selected snaps.

You’ve probably already realised that this won’t be the key to snooping on potential dates or viewing photos of your best mate’s cousin in her bikini on holiday. As Facebook friends reach their hundreds and touch the thousands for some, the development team – including former Facebook figure Dave Morin – has devised a platform based on genuine social science rather than one that offers a potential popularity contest.

This limit of 50 is roughly based on the work of evolutionary psychologist Robin Dunbar, who believes humans can only cope with 150 social relationships at any one time. Fair enough: I can’t think of any more than 70 people I see every few days. Does that mean, though, that I should give up a giant directory of people which is oh-so-handy for many different reasons?

I definitely believe that Path is directing social media down an exciting new route. I admit it, I’m nosey and wouldn’t give up my Facebook profile, but I really like the idea of this utility. It promises to be a supplement to real life and real interactions rather than a simple cyber vantage point from which we can snoop on strangers.

Filed under: Facebook

It would seem not even Justin Timberlake’s Facebook feature film can convince us the site isn’t a pure marketing initiative, hell bent on reaping hotmail addresses, plans for the weekend, your top five Disney films etc.

Today, Canadian security expert Ron Bowes grabbed the UK’s attention with 100m Facebook users’ personal information. The list – farmed from details open for public access – was recently made available for download, according to BBC news. The coding used and info-harvest as a whole is reportedly part of a scheme to predict patterns used by hackers.
In response to Mr Bowes’ efforts, Facebook said:

“People who use Facebook own their information and have the right to share only what they want, with whom they want, and when they want.

“In this case, information that people have agreed to make public was collected by a single researcher and already exists in Google, Bing, other search engines, as well as on Facebook.”

This begs the question: how many times should applications confirm a new user agrees with terms and conditions before signing-up? Two? Three? All FB members are bound to have clicked ‘I accept’ before hurriedly uploading photos of their holiday.

Facebook has no qualms about helping users protect information, issuing instructions almost every time there’s a related news story. According to The Telegraph, just last month the team even promised to ‘drastically simplify’ how users control access to their details.

As reportedly 10,000 are left feeling vulnerable to marketers and now pledge to quit the site, they might be interested in how social media helps users elude mass advertising. In one of my favourite articles of last year, blogger Justin Hunt writes:

“Glossy brand messages – one size fits all – do not work well in a social media context.”

Users of sites like Facebook are savvier than they realise. It’s a space where interaction, making friends, sharing photos etc is all done on the users own terms with whom he/she chooses. Traditional one-way commercials – driving people to drink, drive, listen to, eat, think – have no place in an environment where communications is entered into with both parties consent. As Hunt writes:

‘If you were at a party, you wouldn’t want to be interrupted by someone shouting about a product which you did not care about, would you?’

Here to save the day: PR. Companies need to be more prepared to have the Cluetrain Manifesto’s ‘conversations’ with their consumers that promote relationships. Brands, unable to talk AT the masses, find themselves with Facebook fanpages or devising campaigns users can engage with, if they so wish.

If anything, some might consider Facebook is killing off traditional marketing rather than fuelling the fires. And, to some end, it could be argued that Mr Bowes – whose services are readily available – is at the forefront of corporations aiming to make the most of social media for the good of their business.

Filed under: Facebook