Facebook as Revolutionary Relational Technology

Look, I think well of Facebook, and, sure, I think it can and will become more powerful than it currently is. That said, I find it hard not to be a tad skeptical of some of the stronger claims made by Stanford prof BJ Fogg, who thinks Facebook will prove a bigger revolution than the radio or TV. I mean, huh?? That said, he makes some points worth pondering. Really, I think he's spot on in general. The question is: Will the various impacts be as deep and powerful as he expects, or will he be directionally correct but qualitatively overstated? Probably. But he's still worth listening to, and the dynamics he identifies are to be properly reckoned with:

Q: You think Facebook is the most powerful persuasive tool in human history
-- including radio, telegraph, TV, and all those other things?

A: ... Facebook takes very strong interpersonal influence dynamics -- the
way people persuade each other face-to-face in small groups with peer pressure,
reciprocity, flattery -- and allows those to be used on a mass scale because
your social networks are built in. Friends influence friends, who influence
friends, and that keeps rippling out. They can reach people very quickly for
very little cost and ordinary people can set these in motion. It doesn't require
a big broadcasting company or a big PR campaign. If you get the right message in
the right way, you'll effect millions of people. Facebook has been the best
platform for that, but I think in the future it will be commonplace.

Q: Couldn't you say the same thing about other platforms like MySpace?

A: I think the other platforms will get there. I think Facebook is
leading because it has a high trust culture. Unlike MySpace, where you can be
linked to people you don't know or find out they may not even be real people, in
Facebook you generally know them or you have some certainty they're real people.
Persuasion hinges on the credibility of the source. The advantage of Facebook is
the source credibility is very high.

Q: ... This brings us to the idea of the long tail and niche
communities. Do you see marketing drilling down into these niches in a much
deeper way?

A: As a brand, you can worry about all these micro niches and micro
markets and the long tail, but I think at the end of the day you're not going to
have enough resources to do that. You have to focus on creating a spectacular
product or service, and your market will find you. The people it resonates with
will share it with others, and it will be distributed. It's a big leap of faith
for marketers to think they're not going to have an active role in marketing.
Once you figure out where it's going, then you can start putting resources into
continuing to go into that market or expanding into others.

Here's where I think "Guy, you know sociology and psychology, but I'm not sure about your business savvy." Yes, you can find new and unexpected market segments for your product. But you may also find that you created a product that YOU like but that doesn't have a market. Or not a big enough market. So this idea that somehow Facebook magically allows you to start with the product or company, rather than with the consumer, is awfully misguided.

Q: So marketing is going to become more user-driven?

A: Exactly. Even the notion that you know who your market is may go away. You have a lot more visibility now into who's using your service and why, and you can see how it gets socially shared. You don't have to pre-define your market right out of the gate. As long as you watch what's going on, you can adjust and go with what's working. That's been a big lesson for my start-up and I think it's a lesson for lots of people. If you stay tuned to the metrics, both the quantitative and qualitative feedback, you discover the real genius of your creation, rather than trying to impose
it on a market that may or may not want it.

Again, you DO have to pre-define your market, or you may not have one. And there is considerable concern in the advertising world that Facebook may, in fact, be a really lousy way to try to attract a consumer market. People simply may not want to get marketing messages, peer to peer or otherwise, through the medium. Or they may ... but so far, they don't seem to.

The good news for us is that Facebookers do seem to be cool with causes. Fogg may prove completely correct about the medium's use in peer to peer persuasion but simply be mistaken for the sector that will benefit. Lucky for us.