Btw if you weren't already aware... a lot of small businesses (e.g. mom & pop restaurants, handymen contractors, yoga studios, etc) actually did have a real website but they abandoned them and only maintained their Facebook pages.
The behavior pattern is the same: the "real website" whether it was a CMS built on PHP-Drupal or a Wordpress blog was too complicated for owners to mess with. (e.g. "uh, what's this domain renewal email I just got from Godaddy have to do with my website?!?") The real website then suffers "digital rot" or they expire.
Facebook pages are easier. Therefore, advising them to maintain real websites isn't going to convince them. They've already "been there done that" and saw no value in it. As far as privacy and data collection, businesses don't care -- it's their public storefront.
>> businesses don't care -- it's their public storefront.
Until they land in the news for something and then people can go back and start digging up and doxxing people at the company and any other nefarious information they can get their hands on. ANY information on a business FB page is like a gold mine for social engineers. Everybody on FB eventually "over shares" information they think is safe, but its really not.
The original post was more directed at the individual human FB member.
One problem with FB sites for businesses is loss if identity since the platform looks the same.
I get that small physical shops that don't want to pay for a webmaster etc may have problems updating their sites. But I do miss seeing their original sites.
Twitter and Instagram are ok channels. The problem with FB is the privacy of its individual real person members and their families and friends. When did we sign up to get directed ads etc?
Zuckerberg probably had that idea early on, but the FB members had to accept new terms several times to continue using the platform.
Right now I am working as some kind of developer/marketing/communication 5 legged unicorn and Facebook-based PR is the go-to strategy for everything and anything. I also hear some organisations thinking out loud about completely ditching their websites in favour of Facebook/Twitter presence. (tourism sector)
It's madness. And only works because the train is already rolling and most people are blind of what FB is doing behind the curtains.
Twitter is actually OK in my opinion as it is obviously a more PR like channel by design. (Also Instagram for showcasing new products etc.)
I think that FB sites are a poor substitute for well designed unique websites with depth and relevant information.
The question is how to get viewers or subscribers. But since FB started out as a "personal/friends" service I think that ads and PR will soon be perceived as spam. When people start waking up that is.
The walled-gardenness is what annoys me. It's your communication and publishing medium owned by several big corps. Want to post piratebay links? Facebook blocks you from doing that. Want to post a link to a Chrome extension that lets you filter FB, remove ads, hide posts based on keywords? They block that calling fbpurity.com a malicious website.
Want to post a pic of the Statue of David? Too much nudity. The Vietnamese girl running away from napalm? Same.
Twitter and GMail ar a bit better, but the worry is there. Some Chinese people were worried because their phone disconnected after they said particular keywords. Coincidence, or actual real time monitoring? On Facebook we can see that they are actively monitoring and censoring us, but we keep using them!
Imagine of things like the pipeline protest get classified as "terror events" and Trump-supporting Zuckerberg (Facebook hosted a party with right wing website The Daily Caller, who used Facebook Live Video to spread Trump propaganda to great success, guess who wanted to celebrate that) agrees that talking about it amounts to "support of terrorism". The current occupying regime can even provide fake evidence to suggest "terrorist level" aggression, and if the people on the ground want to refute it, hah, which communication medium do they want to use that would allow that attempt?
> It's madness. And only works because the train is already rolling and most people are blind of what FB is doing behind the curtains.
I basically gave up explaining that because I have to explain how to use FB as a promotion tool and I can't undermine it at the same time because I would lose credibility and leave people more confused than when they came.
> Twitter is actually OK in my opinion as it is obviously a more PR like channel by design. (Also Instagram for showcasing new products etc.)
No, unfortunately it really depends on the niche/market you are following or trying to get into.
> I think that FB sites are a poor substitute for well designed unique websites with depth and relevant information.
> The question is how to get viewers or subscribers. But since FB started out as a "personal/friends" service I think that ads and PR will soon be perceived as spam. When people start waking up that is.
Ditto. With websites we have full control of our statistics and data. I sometimes think that messenger/bot will be the demise of social networks. If somehow marketers can get people to subscribe to bots (with a common API that would abstract whether you are using whatsapp, telegram, etc.) then social networks leash would loosen a bit. That would mean we would be back to something looking a lot like e-mail but whatev'.
I am not tailored for marketing anyway so I am pretty sure I am talking bs.
I don't have yet the whole vocabulary figured out. This is first hand report from a colleague working in another autonomous sister branch of my org. The plan would be to go full FB/insta/twitter only and it's still in the 'what if' stage.
Btw if you weren't already aware... a lot of small businesses (e.g. mom & pop restaurants, handymen contractors, yoga studios, etc) actually did have a real website but they abandoned them and only maintained their Facebook pages.
The behavior pattern is the same: the "real website" whether it was a CMS built on PHP-Drupal or a Wordpress blog was too complicated for owners to mess with. (e.g. "uh, what's this domain renewal email I just got from Godaddy have to do with my website?!?") The real website then suffers "digital rot" or they expire.
Facebook pages are easier. Therefore, advising them to maintain real websites isn't going to convince them. They've already "been there done that" and saw no value in it. As far as privacy and data collection, businesses don't care -- it's their public storefront.