
Facebook is basically dead and buried with UK teenagers - r0h1n
http://www.experientia.com/blog/ethnographic-research-facebook-is-basically-dead-and-buried-with-uk-teenagers
======
eftpotrm
I'm in the UK and do voluntary work with teenagers.

While I can't at all say my sample is representative or that I've I polled
them to check, my experience is that it definitely isn't dead and buried;
these teenagers definitely still use it, and in ways that don't suggest it's
just to pander to their parents.

Anecdote not data I know, but the headline conclusion sounds over-broad to me.

~~~
melling
Yep, 2014 is looking like it's going to be the year of "FACEBOOK IS DEAD"
articles.

Just 9 days ago we discussed the end of the Facebook era.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6917392](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6917392)

Personally, I'm curious why we care that much? Is there some benefit to
knowing the fate of Facebook? Are we shorting the stock?

~~~
jinushaun
It was like this during the IPO too. The internet really just likes to hate on
FB for whatever reason. You don't here the same about Twitter, whose stock is
outperforming FB despite making less money.

~~~
robertjwebb
Maybe people think that if everyone believes Facebook is dead then it will
die. Facebook has information on everyone and it's really hard to leave
because everyone else uses it. If it just fucking disappeared one day I would
be so happy.

------
pasbesoin
I learned this over a decade ago managing one of those old-fashioned "forums".
A decent-sized and long lived one.

The secret to overall satisfaction (there will always be outliers) is a policy
and approach of "opt-in".

We never tried to "break" anonymity. As people became comfortable with each
other, they often shared personal contact information (mostly, privately). And
because they were otherwise anonymous, they felt comfortable sharing and
discussing matters they otherwise would not have. To everyone's benefit.

We had limits, and these were stated up front, and forum members felt invested
in pointing them out and helping to enforce them (e.g. reporting serious
violations) when necessary. Forum members also had input to the policy, both
in ongoing suggestions as well as during periodic, publicly announced reviews.

People participated as much, or as little, as they wanted to. And they shared,
both publicly and privately, what they wanted to. Private and orthogonal
communication channels were, well, if not overtly encouraged, then certainly
not discouraged -- although we would caution people about sharing too much too
quickly.

Think about it. Take your time. "Opt in" to what you are comfortable with.

We ended up with a very loyal and long-standing community. And a significantly
sized one, that did literally span the globe.

Now, from a mass commercial perspective, perhaps many people will find
difficulty in how such policy and site is supposed to work, financially. And
I'm not saying I have all the answers to that.

Nonetheless, "opt-in" still nags at me as the way to go.

When Facebook was more "opt-in", it was the hotness. Size and Grandma being on
it (not to mention your _parents_ \-- argh!) may be one thing -- one
deterrent.

But the loss of "opt-in", and an increasingly panopticon feel? That to me
seems far worse.

Facebook should be improving opt-in and the ability to segregate into
communities that have their own degrees of privacy.

Encourage people to meet and share -- on their own terms. Provide the venue.

Don't force it on them.

------
TazeTSchnitzel
I am a seventeen-year-old girl. I have no idea eat they're on about. Everyone
here uses Facebook. It is not dead nor dying.

~~~
r0h1n
I'm a 37 year old (jeez, typing that suddenly made me feel much, much older)
male. I went from being an early, avid, oversharing Facebook user to quitting
it 6 months back.

But that's just what it is. Two anecdotal examples which by themselves neither
prove nor disprove anything.

~~~
jesuscrust
>male

Are you a dog or something? Because the proper word for describing a male of
the human species is "man". You're not a male, you're a MAN.

~~~
r0h1n
Woof! You got me there. I'm a dog, because then of course it makes perfect
sense to you when I say I am a 37 year old male :)

~~~
GFischer
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_y...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_you're_a_dog)

------
awjr
Are teenagers just selecting the tool that is right for them?

Facebook has this horrible habit of trying to work out what you would most
like to see in your feed. It's exceptionally transient.

Teenagers are moving to Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat and WhatsApp because they
do a better specific job. Switching between apps isn't hard.

However FB is very good for event organisation or even a cheap meetup.com
alternative.

Of note I find twitter etc less invasive. When you look at the FB app
permissions it really really wants to know pretty much everything that is
going on in your phone.

~~~
brazzy
> Facebook has this horrible habit of trying to work out what you would most
> like to see in your feed. It's exceptionally transient.

That's a feature introduced not long ago to _reduce_ transience - feeds were
dominated by chatty users and apps, everything else got drowned out. IMO it's
a _hugely_ important and useful feature that any other feed-based service must
replicate unless chooses to be completely transient, i.e. twitter. Facebook is
not transient at all - individual timelines still contain everything, and even
the feed does not, in my experience, change retroactively.

~~~
DanBC
I would love it if Facebook would just remember my preferred setting of "view
everything, by everyone, and display it in chronological order".

And then allow me to mute chatty users.

Because at the moment I have one chatty user posting the equivalent of "funny
email forwards" which all get shown to me, and items from my family are muted.

That's on the desktop browser website, not any app. (Goodness only knows how
the app works).

While I'm here: I post photos. Photos either go to "everyone can see these" or
to a single list "semi-private". I only ever use those two, never ever
anything else. Facebook generated list names populate the drop-down selector,
meaning that choosing "semi private" from the list is clunky and irritating.

Haha, wow, this post sound really grumpy but it isn't meant to be.

~~~
s3r3nity
Hmmm a few years ago a friend who worked there told me they experimented with
having two tabs: one with their machine learning algorithm, and one that was
like Twitter and just had 'everything, by everyone, in chronological order.'
Do you know what happened? <i> Duration per user on the site went down </i> by
a statistically significant margin.

One of the things they do well is micro-optimize many different features and
use machine learning & data analytics to provide the "best" features, whatever
that may be. What they DO suffer from sometimes is lack of prioritization of
the correct features (like messaging, removal of certain features, pages
products, etc.)

~~~
DanBC
I spend several minutes everytime I use Facebook wondering how the hell I can
achieve something, or where on the page the button is hidden, or what this
inscrutable icon will do.

"Time on the site" is similar to the supermarket trick of moving items around
to make customers look for things, thus exposing them to more 'buying
opportunities' of stuff they wouldn't normally look at.

It's probably great for them, but it's not so fun for the user / customer.

~~~
e12e
It's funny. when I started using fb I just kept an eye on the email
notifications: a permanent stream of all activity (including posts later
deleted by the poster). It worked perfectly for me; it was before the worst of
the farmville-style app-spam -- but I'm sure killing that was just a (bayesian
or not) spam-filter away if I'd felt the need.

With what fb has morphed into, I generally assume the only way to share stuff
with friends (in a way that they'll actually have the opportunity to see it or
_choose_ to ignore it) is to tag them or share directly on their wall. In
other words; I might as well send an email with a couple of cc's tacked on.

I don't really mind that they're sabotaging their own product; I much prefer a
decentralized, self-hosted web. It does mean I'll see less from many friends
though - people that (rightfully) don't bother setting up a home page.

------
arethuza
I asked my teenage son (~15) about what he and his friends were using and his
answer surprised me - he said anyone using Facebook was "weird" as "it's for
old people" (direct quotes). This surprised me as he (and everyone he knows)
have been ultra keen Facebook users for the last few years. He's not really
into tech apart from game playing and socializing.

SnapChat and a bit of SMS are apparently what he uses these days.

~~~
bluedino
I heard the exact same thing from a group of kids over at a friends for a
slumber party. Even his own son said "I only keep it to talk to mom"

------
thejosh
There is always going to be one form of online chat that people will use, no
matter the other websites.

ICQ / MSN / FB Chat / WhatsApp / whatever it is in the future teens will use
it and love it.

I loved ICQ & MSN growing up, I can't wait to see what comes in the next 10
years.

~~~
justincormack
Its amazing how badly google lost on this, from a great start.

------
davidgerard
... I had to explain to our older teen, who lives on Facebook, what Twitter
was.

("It's where middle-aged Guardian readers post outrageous articles from the
Guardian for other middle-aged Guardian readers to be outraged about and post
their outrage at the Guardian on Twitter. For Guardian readers, middle age
starts at fifteen.")

------
denzil_correa
The original article is two links from the OP link.

Original Link - [http://theconversation.com/facebooks-so-uncool-but-its-
morph...](http://theconversation.com/facebooks-so-uncool-but-its-morphing-
into-a-different-beast-21548)

There are more details their blog though - [http://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/social-
networking/](http://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/social-networking/)

------
joshferg
No statistics on the sourced article, just a bunch of anthropologists'
interviews with teenagers that cannot simply explain the whole of this
situation. Eternal September has seemed to sweep HN with this garbage somehow
making it to the top.

~~~
elag
That's what qualitative research is. "There are more things in heaven and
earth, Horatio... &c".

------
brazzy
So, Facebook isn't anymore a cool new thing teenagers obsess about. Wowzers!!
Does that really surprise anyone? It's not exactly a sustainable niche, kinda
by definition. The real question is whether those teenagers, once grown up and
less interested in beingt cool and different from their parents, will start
seeing value in what Facebook offers, i.e. whether network effects in social
media are cross-generational. I suspect so, since generations are not in fact
discrete.

------
SurfScore
I've found myself using Facebook less and less the older I get. I used it
every day in high school, relatively often in college, and barely go on
anymore. I have an account simply because I have to. Its always changing on
me, there's a bunch of new stuff that I have no idea how to use, and my news
feed is a bunch of annoying gibberish that I don't care about and don't feel
like spending the time to improve. I'm not sure if I'm the norm or not, but if
they're starting to lose the age segment I personally was most active in, that
can't be a good thing.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few years. On the plus
side for Facebook, they own Instagram, one of the things said to be gaining
the market they are losing, so they can still reach it. However, it remains to
be seen how well they can monetize Instagram.

------
k_kelly
I feel like teens are the stick used to beat Facebook because they've never
really been the ones who fanatically used it.

This study seems to constantly come out saying teens are using x messenger
app. Facebook isn't a messaging system like Snapchat or WhatsApp. It's a repo
for social contacts and experiences, which is why it has a symbiotic
relationship with messaging apps (people sent texts while Facebook was only on
the web! Facebook is losing ground to texts!).

Of the four Twitter and Instagram are the competitors but both lack the walled
garden that Facebook offers. Facebook for all it's privacy concerns makes
these look like a safe-house.

Instagram treads the role of messaging app and social network best, and is
owned by Facebook and is deeply integrated. That doesn't seem like a dead and
buried social network.

------
nknighthb
I see no numbers anywhere. Just breathless rhetoric labelled "insights". Where
is the evidence?

------
ChrisNorstrom
Yeah, a "Real Name Policy" will do that to your startup. When everything you
say has your name and photo next to it you're much less likely to say
anything. Every single one of your personal opinions offends someone or is in
disagreement with someone out there and it's only a matter of time before they
discover it and discover you. In this case kids' personal lives were being
revealed in front of their parents+teachers+bosses and everyone else that's
now on facebook.

Maybe if Facebook changed over to pseudonyms and was more transparent with the
data they collected on everyone, people wouldn't have so much to worry about.

~~~
treenyc
I stop using facebook. Why don't people just stop talking about facebook and
just use diaspora.

------
crag
God.. every year I read some story about "Facebook is dead because" blah,
blah, blah.

Look you want to kill FB then create something. And please not another FB
clone; we need something different. And better.

It's like, when I lived in SFO, I could't throw a dead cat without hitting
someone who wrote the "next greatest social network", and yet FB is still
here.

~~~
kenkam
I don't see how that article talks about the FB killer. It merely states that
it has observed UK teenagers moving away from Facebook and cites various
reasons, one of them being parents encouraging the use of FB.

Maybe a FB killer is an app made for parents that persuades them to encourage
their kids to use FB?

------
spobin
I'm in the UK and my 17 year-old sister and her friends still use Facebook
every day. Snapchat seems to be growing in popularity though.

------
edh649
I'm a teenager in the UK and Facebook has most certainly not died. it seems to
me that people do use it less now but that may just be due to growing up (no
more farmville etc.). However, Facebook is still heavily used for setting up
events, sharing photos, and messaging people. The reason why facebook is so
good at all of these things? Because everyone has Facebook. If I need to ask a
friend something, There are several ways to ask them:

\- Text: Might not have their number, have to pay, it's only available on
their phone, not on their computer

\- WhatsApp (or similar): They may not have it, I may not be their contact,
only available on their phones

\- SnapChat: Hard to hold a conversation with someone

\- Instagram: Great for sharing photos, not for communicating

\- Facebook: Am Friends with everyone I will need to contact. Easy to use.
They receive it on their phone and computer (more likely to see it sooner).
Free.

Facebook may lose some interest from people but I'm sure it will be around for
a long time, at least until the large majority of people have moved to another
platform where they can communicate

~~~
hgh
I find it pretty interesting that email isn't even an option in that list.

~~~
edh649
Opps, Forgot that: that's how irrelevant it's become.

Email is just for signing up for things and for 'professional' communication
(e.g. job offers, work placements, to teachers etc.). I think I only have
about 5 of my friends email addresses, mainly just because sometimes I'll need
to CC them into something.

------
pikachu_is_cool
WOW! Teenagers are moving away from Facebook? That's SHOCKING news. Fresh
stuff, I had no idea Twitter and Whatsapp are also social networks! And I
didn't know Facebook could be in competition with itself (Instagram). And it's
not like I read the exact same article, except with actual content, two months
ago. Definitely deserves to be on the front page of HN.

------
alan_cx
Its not 'dead' or 'not dead', its that they now use other sites and services
too, resulting in less time with facebook exclusively. A few years ago its was
almost 100% FB. Now its just one of many services they use.

Also think there might be a historic thing going on where FB was designed for
large screen PCs, other services are more targeted at mobile, and FB has had
to catch up with that, but lost out to some others along the way, as it were.
I think BB still feels heavy, the other services feel light.

I just think many people now use FB for what it was originally for. But, its
now a little off putting becuase its clogged up with other features that other
sites just do better.

------
nly
The Facebook app is just a portal to the website. Apps that appeared as apps
first seem to be a bit more of sanctuary, as I'm pretty sure mums and dads
everywhere haven't quite yet mastered the whole app concept. My parents for
instance still have feature phones despite using Facebook.

Personally, I'm glad to see apps that are primarily used for conversation,
rather than obsessing about what our 'friends' are doing every and any minute
of the day, are becoming more popular. For me Facebook has wholly been
replaced by Twitter and Whatsapp, and I've noticed my younger cousins are
using BBM and Skype.

~~~
wingerlang
In asia it seems that the *most popular messengers also includes some form of
"timeline".

Malaysia: WhatsApp Thailand (and Japan I think): Line

But I guess they are still MOSTLY used for the direct chatting.

------
mathattack
It seems like different tools for different purposes. Once grandma and
potential emitters got on Facebook it lost its edge, if not it's use. It's
more about PG sharing. I find that 5% of my friends dominate the feed. I'm not
sure if it's the algorithm, or that they are narcissists.

Twitter seems more event and business promotion oriented / maybe persona
oriented.

Snapchat is the one to send bad stuff that your parents and teachers won't
find out about.

------
samweinberg
Facebook is basically dead and buried with kids my age too, at least in my
area. It's really only used for messaging and event planning now. Most teens
are on Twitter and Snapchat. Although not as much as there used to be, there
are still a lot of people on Instagram too.

I don't think you can confidently say that "x is dead" and have it be true for
everyone in a certain age group in every area. It's a case-by-case type of
thing.

------
enraged_camel
>>Where once parents worried about their children joining Facebook, the
children now say it is their family that insists they stay there to post about
their lives.

This is absolutely the case for me. I was born and raised in Turkey and I
currently live in LA. I attempted to quit Facebook several times, only to come
back when my mom insisted that she felt disconnected from me when my status
updates stopped.

------
muratmutlu
"In answer we have 15 months research @ 9 towns around the world = 1000
insights."

That's not a very big group for the UK to make such a statement

------
yosoyzenitram
In Spain this is happening the reverse way: the first Spanish social network
(Tuenti), which was the most popular amongst teenagers, is dying and being
buried due to the loss of users to the more feature-grown Facebook.

Tuenti was bought by Telefónica and basically I think they're going to end up
pivoting to be only the only thing that is still profitable for them (a MVNO
called Tuenti Móvil).

------
dimfisch
It's amazing how fast the world moves on.

~~~
elnate
One age group in one country isn't exactly 'moved on' yet. Waning yes, but
still a force to be reckoned with.

~~~
jrs99
myspace was a force to be reckoned with.

~~~
Grue3
Myspace was a site for teenagers. Facebook isn't. Old people don't give a crap
about what the newest fad of the week is.

~~~
jrs99
but old people die.

~~~
brazzy
but young people turn into old people - and, at the moment, at a faster rate
than old people are dying.

------
sifarat
Social networking overall has run its course. below are the phases it has gone
through like everything else.

1\. Initial Launch: OMG! Cool. Signup

2\. More people Jump in, it becomes even more exciting.

3\. Everyone starts using it.

4\. Eventually, excitement starts to fade away.

5\. It becomes boring.

6\. People's addiction eventually starts to decline.

7\. People totally lose their interest.

8\. Eventually, it becomes a ghost town. End.

Google+ even couldn’t pass through the 2nd phase.

~~~
brazzy
The steps from 4 to 7 seems to me not to be at all inevitable. Facebook
provides pretty solid and sustainable value in allowing you to keep in touch
with people you know. It does not require excitement, hype and obsession for
that.

Of course, if usage intensity declines, so does revenue (but also costs).

~~~
sifarat
the advantage or significance of facebook is that, it has been able to
prolonged these phases.

------
mainguy
I was trying to figure out how and why someone would bury Facebook and a bunch
of UK teenagers...but now I get it...

------
toupeira
Facebook just seems broken to me. Out of my 170 friends the news feed only
shows me 4-5 posts per day, and only going back 4-5 days for a boring total of
about 20 posts. I'm pretty sure there's more content, but Facebook doesn't
seem to want me to see it.

------
jkscm
Can someone find quantitative information? The fact that teenagers say that
they use cooler apps like Snapchat or instagram does not imply that Facebook
has to loose.

Maybe they spent more time on their smartphones overall or they spend less
time with older media like TV and radio?

------
pastpartisan
And yet Facebook stock keeps going up everyday

Probably because kids are using instagram which is also owned by facebook, so
either way facebook wins. Facebook is becoming increasingly popular among the
middle aged and this also is the most profitable demographic.

------
MLR
I think if a new social network came out, that had a bare bones layout, and
just had Events/Pages/Friends then that would come in and dominate again.

As soon as they start trying to be too big and do too much they lose their
edge.

~~~
untilHellbanned
doubt it

------
wslh
I came up with a different conclusion from the same study: there are only
seven countries in the world.

------
yalogin
Teenagers are moving to Twitter? Really? Snapchat and whatsapp I can
understand. But Twitter?

------
quattrofan
Is anyone surprised?

