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

A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

blog.eat24hours.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 107 posts

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#71

Post by evgen »

eertami wrote: post #61
ryandrake wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand the difference between " ads" and " 's content". Facebook is a promotional platform. Content posted there by companies are advertisements, nearly by definition.

But doesn't it change things slightly if you are subscribing to these advertisements? The new Facebook algorithm is kind of like signing up (liking) to a newsletter and then only receiving it every 10th edition.

Liking your ad/page does not mean I want a constant stream of your ads. Under what circumstances would you believe that just because I said that I liked something you posted once or twice you now have some claim on my attention in the future and under what circumstances would that claim end?

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#72

Post by sparkzilla »

evgen wrote: post #62
sparkzilla wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Just no. Like many other small businesses, I paid thousands of dollars to Facebook for ads to create fan pages. People who were interested in what I was doing became fans (I had about 4000 in all). There was never any indication from Facebook that they would make it increasingly difficult to reach those people, and those fans were never told that they would not see my posts. Due to changes in their algorithm I wa…

The fact that I liked your page last year does not mean that I stil want a constant stream of your store updates and coupons. The amount of stuff that can be put onto my Facebook news feed is finite, and the number of people who think they have some entitlement to that space because of a single action they convinced me to take in the distant past is constantly growing. You didn't do anything to grow Facebook other th…

So many things wrong with this post. Firstly, the system before was fine: For four years people voluntarily chose to engage with my fan page and receive posts from my business. If fans didn't like my posts they could block them or leave the page. Facebook never said at any time they would throttle fans' access to my content, so yes, it was a cheap advertising channel. That's why we used Facebook instead of some other social network.

If you are happy to let your newsfeed be determined not by what you want but by who pays the most then good luck to you. It's bad for the fans and bad for us, and ultimately -- as you can see by the increasing number of anti-Facebook posts -- it's bad for Facebook.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#73

Post by nb4hnp »

_superposition_ wrote: post #28

And I can't even post a comment on their blog to show support because I closed my fb account. Oh the irony... Anyway, more power to ya.

I'm in the same boat here. It's almost (almost... but not quite) worth reactivating just to show support. I'm sure the publicity from this stunt will be plenty without my input. This post and the one about how they advertised on a porn site (http://blog.eat24hours.com/how-to-advertise-on-a-porn-websit...) had me laughing so loud I woke up my roommate.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#74

Post by j2kun »

j2kun wrote: post #68

The algorithm they describe is apparently called "EdgeRank." All I can find via Google are really bad infographics and worse layman explanations (ones that make it clear the writer doesn't understand basic graph theory, or is adulterating their understanding for whatever reason). Can anyone post a link to a research-level paper explaining the algorithm? The name EdgeRank makes me think it's a ripoff of PageRank, so a…

Ah. It appears to be nothing more complicated than computing this linear formula given, and Facebook has a thousand tiny little knobs for adjusting the parameters.

Maybe the problem is that their algorithm is not really an algorithm. PageRank was good because it had an interpretation as a random walk that made sense (before SEO). EdgeRank can only be interpreted as an arbitrary formula.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#75

Post by morgante »

sparkzilla wrote: post #69
morgante wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of resorting to emotion, can you explain a compelling alternative for how Facebook could actually solve this? Yes, you have 4000 fans. But I'm 99% sure you're not the only page they like. They probably like many other pages, and also have many other friends (2 numbers that increase over time). Do you not see how it's literally impossible for every post I'm subscribed to reach me? This is purely a problem of s…

Facebook started to throttle response just over a year ago, well after most people already had all of their friends in their feed, and well after most people had joined most of the pages they like. It's no coincidence that Facebook told me I could get more views by spending money to reach the same people I had been reaching organically just a few weeks before. The solution is to stop trying to extort money from the b…

You're acting as though Facebook has somehow blocked fans from visiting your page. They're of course free to do so.

Given that you accept it's a statistical impossibility for all content I'm subscribed to to reach my feed, what we're debating is priorities. Before this algorithm change, I fully believe it was tilted too far in terms of brands—I received way too many updates from brands and few from my friends.

What you call extortion is what every sane person in the world calls advertising. If a magazine writes a story about my business (free advertising), that obviously doesn't entitle me to free advertising in all future issues. Neither does Facebook once giving you free reach.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#76

Post by morgante »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #70
morgante wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of resorting to emotion, can you explain a compelling alternative for how Facebook could actually solve this? Yes, you have 4000 fans. But I'm 99% sure you're not the only page they like. They probably like many other pages, and also have many other friends (2 numbers that increase over time). Do you not see how it's literally impossible for every post I'm subscribed to reach me? This is purely a problem of s…

> Do you not see how it's literally impossible for every post I'm subscribed to reach me? And requiring people to pay to reach fans somehow magically fixes this? Does the payment requirement somehow supercede the best algorithms in perfectly balancing post activity? And, do brands with deeper pockets somehow automatically have the most compelling content? Do you sincerely believe that this is all about solving that p…

> Does the payment requirement somehow supercede the best algorithms in perfectly balancing post activity?

Yes. That's precisely the point. As a business, you can accept whatever the algorithm dictates or you can pay to override the algorithm (ie. advertising). No different than the tradeoff between hoping a magazine writes an article about you vs. guaranteed reach by purchasing an ad.

> This statement is obviously and mathematically less true than it once was.

I don't dispute this. It's the natural result of a growing network while people's attention stays finite.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#77

Post by corresation »

frostmatthew wrote: post #65
sergiotapia wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, no. I disagree with what you're saying. If I create a page for my business and share coupons and stuff, people are free to come like my page. That means they want to see more of my stuff voluntarily. Why is Facebook extorting money from the business to allow users to see what they want to see?

It's not "extortion" - Facebook is under no obligation to provide businesses with 100% reach (or indeed any reach) for free. Facebook is not a non-profit or some government service - they are a business. And just like you want to make money for your business, they want to make money for theirs. [And if they don't make money they go out of business and that certainly won't increase your reach] IMO Facebook should have…

IMO Facebook should have never offered any free reach for businesses

It has always confused me that Facebook has done so little to monetize businesses, many of whom now list their Facebook pages in major advertising campaigns rather than their own website. Traditionally the service that Facebook provides to businesses was a pretty high value one, and it wasn't that the businesses brought users -- the businesses went to Facebook because the users were already there.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#78

Post by jsonne »

I actually kind of feel for facebook. Not even a year ago people were complaining about Facebook not having enough relevant content etc. So they were migrating away. Old facebook was filled with commercial spam and made it a crappy experience. EdgeRank helped with that aspect a lot.

Switching hats, this also bothers me though. I'm a marketer for a lot of local businesses through my agency, and obviously this sucks. It's still a really valuable platform from a paid perspective. In fact using the some images and copy on facebook versus Reddit I get almost 5x the CTR and conversions. I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you're savvy and you're willing to treat Facebook like any other ad network there's still a lot of value to be had. The days of free engagement from pages seems to be coming to an end. That really sucks for people who paid to build their's up. Going back on features like that and screwing people etc. seems to be an endemic of the tech industry as a whole though and not just Facebook. Google Reader anyone?

I know this is more of a rant and points out more problems than solutions, but I just wanted to point out the situation is more complex than Facebook is bad let's hate them.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#79

Post by robot_head »

jsonne wrote: post #78

I actually kind of feel for facebook. Not even a year ago people were complaining about Facebook not having enough relevant content etc. So they were migrating away. Old facebook was filled with commercial spam and made it a crappy experience. EdgeRank helped with that aspect a lot. Switching hats, this also bothers me though. I'm a marketer for a lot of local businesses through my agency, and obviously this sucks. I…

Nobody paid Google any money to create a following on Google Reader, and then made that following worthless... Not really a fair comparison.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#80

Post by sparkzilla »

morgante wrote: post #75
sparkzilla wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook started to throttle response just over a year ago, well after most people already had all of their friends in their feed, and well after most people had joined most of the pages they like. It's no coincidence that Facebook told me I could get more views by spending money to reach the same people I had been reaching organically just a few weeks before. The solution is to stop trying to extort money from the b…

You're acting as though Facebook has somehow blocked fans from visiting your page. They're of course free to do so. Given that you accept it's a statistical impossibility for all content I'm subscribed to to reach my feed, what we're debating is priorities. Before this algorithm change, I fully believe it was tilted too far in terms of brands—I received way too many updates from brands and few from my friends. What y…

If your feed before was "tilted too fat in terms of brands" then you could easily have hidden them from the feed or unsubscribed.

Your analogy is wrong. Facebook did not write a free story about my business. I paid them to help me gather a group of people who were interested in my business. They never at any point said that I would have to pay to access those users. Then, after I spent a lot of money, time and effort maintaining that group, they told me that I couldn't access them without paying them again and again. That's extortion, not advertising.

As someone who has ran a business that has sold many millions of dollars of advertising you don't screw over your readers and advertisers to make an extra buck. It might work in the short term, but it's a failing business strategy.

Post reply on HN