Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Biggest drop in Facebook organic reach we have seen

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 138 posts

Re: Biggest drop in Facebook organic reach we have seen

#61

Post by jasode »

visarga wrote: post #20

That's what happens when we abandon protocols (RSS feeds) in favor of walled gardens.

>That's what happens when we abandon protocols (RSS feeds)

Yes, in general terms, there's always an abstract discussion about RSS vs Facebook,Twitter,Google AMP, etc.

However, your particular comment is not relevant to this particular blog post. The RSS protocol is "free" but that doesn't matter if it does not address the targets that Facebook does.

(Besides that, the journalist writes for DennikN and they didn't "abandon" the RSS feed. It's at: https://dennikn.sk/rss-odber/)

We can't just reflexively reply with "RSS" every time the trigger word "Facebook" comes up. It needs to be relevant. RSS is not applicable to what the journalist is talking about. RSS is not relevant to the perspective of the publisher for metrics of "audience reach". RSS feed is a convenience tool for the reader and the blog post isn't about that perspective.

Re: Biggest drop in Facebook organic reach we have seen

#62

Post by dep_b »

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #36
dep_b wrote: post #28

If I see how many companies don't create a homepage but rely on Facebook entirely. Or have a very stale homepage while they keep posting news on Facebook and Instagram. And I don't get it, if you use a free Wordpress setup with a few simple plug-ins you can already post all of your content immediately to all social media channels together with an update on your homepage.

IG engagement is so much higher for many categories, people just don't interact with websites like they do with social media

I see bars and restaurants always post stuff happy Friday pictures with food photos all of the time yet information about what beer or food they actually serve remains a mystery on their social media channels. If they didn't bother with a website I'm basically just guessing based on what they took pictures of.

Re: Biggest drop in Facebook organic reach we have seen

#63

Post by albertgoeswoof »

dep_b wrote: post #62
albertgoeswoof wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IG engagement is so much higher for many categories, people just don't interact with websites like they do with social media

I see bars and restaurants always post stuff happy Friday pictures with food photos all of the time yet information about what beer or food they actually serve remains a mystery on their social media channels. If they didn't bother with a website I'm basically just guessing based on what they took pictures of.

In that case they're probably just looking to grow their following by having a high enough engagement to appear in the featured page of IG, and remind their existing followers that they exist. Here it's less about promoting the food and more about promoting the image of the food, so it gets shared more widely.

Re: Biggest drop in Facebook organic reach we have seen

#64

Post by ameister14 »

bobbinsbob wrote: post #56
bhouston wrote: post #41

Facebook pulling a bait and switch for newspapers that forces them to pay to reach an audience they used to reach for free (organic reach)? This has only happened repeatedly in the history of facebook. Facebook is like a game where the difficulty rises after you've had a taste of success. And by difficulty I mean you have to pay to reach your previous levels of success. Facebook did this for those first games (e.g. F…

>"Facebook is like a game where the difficulty rises after you've had a taste of success. And by difficulty I mean you have to pay to reach your previously levels of success" Your analogy would sound better, and imo, reflect reality more if you swapped out 'game' for 'drug'. That is to say, Facebook is like a drug (like heroin), the more you use it the more you have to pay to get the same level of high. Don't become…

Except that doesn't work as an analogy because the end-users are not the ones paying.

Re: Biggest drop in Facebook organic reach we have seen

#65

Post by j-c-hewitt »

Frankly the only stuff that is not completely brain-melting on Facebook can be found in groups, which mostly doesn't do a lot of moving posts around based on what the system thinks you'll engage with. I only use Facebook to advertise to people, having long grown disgusted and bored by the main timeline as a user.

Re: Biggest drop in Facebook organic reach we have seen

#66

Post by wu-ikkyu »

ameister14 wrote: post #64
bobbinsbob wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Facebook is like a game where the difficulty rises after you've had a taste of success. And by difficulty I mean you have to pay to reach your previously levels of success" Your analogy would sound better, and imo, reflect reality more if you swapped out 'game' for 'drug'. That is to say, Facebook is like a drug (like heroin), the more you use it the more you have to pay to get the same level of high. Don't become…

Except that doesn't work as an analogy because the end-users are not the ones paying.

They are paying with their data and attention to advertisements

Re: Biggest drop in Facebook organic reach we have seen

#67

Post by Nokinside »

bhouston wrote: post #41

Facebook pulling a bait and switch for newspapers that forces them to pay to reach an audience they used to reach for free (organic reach)? This has only happened repeatedly in the history of facebook. Facebook is like a game where the difficulty rises after you've had a taste of success. And by difficulty I mean you have to pay to reach your previous levels of success. Facebook did this for those first games (e.g. F…

It's standard go to strategy once you control the supply chain.

Maybe it should be called Walmart strategy because it was perfected by them. First they propose a deal. You get access to the massive Walmart supply channel for this good deal. Sales volumes and profits soar. Half year later Walmart buyers negotiate price little lower, then lower still. You must lower the quality of the brand little to make it. And it goes on and on. Finally it becomes almost impossible to separate from Walmart because finding another supply channel for the bulk you end up making is next to impossible. Walmart never stops squeezing once it has you.

Re: Biggest drop in Facebook organic reach we have seen

#68

Post by 23443463453 »

bhouston wrote: post #41

Facebook pulling a bait and switch for newspapers that forces them to pay to reach an audience they used to reach for free (organic reach)? This has only happened repeatedly in the history of facebook. Facebook is like a game where the difficulty rises after you've had a taste of success. And by difficulty I mean you have to pay to reach your previous levels of success. Facebook did this for those first games (e.g. F…

Facebook really is a nefarious and rather heinous and corrupting entity in all of human society. It is quite amazing how humans are following the same pattern they followed through industrialization, essentially allowing a new technology fully and totally co-opt society on manic assumption that it's a positive, while it rots out the substance and core of humanity with and ultimate implosion that came in the form of the world wars.

Re: Biggest drop in Facebook organic reach we have seen

#69

Post by yellow_postit »

AndrewDucker wrote: post #38
bpicolo wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The annoying bit is that (with the current model), if my friend likes cute puppies, then I'm forever cursed with them too, at the expense of all the things I actually want to see.

That is absolutely annoying as well. It's as if Facebook should show me the things I've asked it to, and show you the things you've asked it to, and not try and take mine away or give them to you.

Inferring that people that are “friends” may share the same interests doesn’t seem that unreasonable to me.

Re: Biggest drop in Facebook organic reach we have seen

#70

Post by dhimes »

AndrewDucker wrote: post #5

The annoying thing here, as a Facebook user, is that if I've liked the "Cute Puppies" page it's because I want to see their cute puppies. To then strip them entirely out of my Facebook feed unless they hand Facebook some cash feels like a step back in my usage of Facebook.

I read it as you could go to a separate feed (Explore Feed) and see all of the pages you follow. As a user I may actually like this better.
Post reply on HN