Is Facebook losing its identity?

Facebook lists Facebook will help to suggest lists to users based on people's workplaces, school or similar

What's up with Facebook? Every day this week seems to bring a new announcement about some tweak to the way the network operates, and that's before next week's F8 event, where we expect to hear about a music service, possibly operated by Spotify.

This week's announcements are all about how you manage and control your public presence on Facebook.

First, "improved" friend lists, which as far as I understand will let us choose more carefully who gets to see what. This is how the company's blog sells it:

"Want to see posts from your closest friends? Or perhaps you'd like to share a personal story with your family - without also telling all your co-workers. With improved Friend Lists, you can easily see updates from and share with different lists of friends."

The promise is that Facebook will take the heavy lifting out of separating your contacts into separate groups by giving us smart lists, which will look at people who appear to share a workplace, a school or a family with you and suggest they go into a particular list.

The aim appears to be to rival Google+, the new social network that has acquired a degree of traction with techies, by offering greater control of how you share information.

The trouble with this for me, and I suspect many others, is that it makes the whole business of managing your social networking activity just a bit too tedious.

Strangers' status

Who has got the time to draw up lists - or Google+ circles - and then worry about who gets what each time you post something?

The other Facebook announcement, slipped out without much fanfare, appears to be aimed directly at Twitter.

It allows you to subscribe to the feed of anyone - celebrities, journalists, politicians - even if they are not your friends. It sounds like a privacy nightmare - but the people in question have to opt first to switch on the "allow subscribers" button.

David Cameron's Google+ page All three party leaders already have a presence on Facebook and Twitter

It will be interesting to see whether celebrities race to acquire millions of subscribers, just as they compete for Twitter followers. But don't most people see Facebook as a more private place than Twitter, and won't they feel disinclined to use it to speak to the world rather than their friends?

Mark Zuckerberg has been on a long campaign to persuade Facebook users that more is better when it comes to sharing stuff online - he seems eager for us all to live our lives in public.

There also seems be a certain paranoia at the network's Palo Alto headquarters about the threat from competition, especially from Google.

As if to feed that paranoia, Google announced yesterday that all three leaders of the main UK political parties had signed up to Google+. You can see their profiles here: David Cameron, Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg.

But judging by the reaction from other users, the politicians may decide that spending much time "engaging" via Google+ is not that worthwhile.

Here's one comment on David Cameron's page:

"Mr Cameron, 106 comments in 15 hours and they seem genuine - but none are asking relevant questions and some are offensive, so it is not a surprise that you have not responded."

The landscape of social networking , after a period of massive upheavals, seems to be settling down.

Facebook is the mass market network for personal use, Twitter is a news platform for public broadcasting of information and views, and Google+ is a niche forum for the geek community.

So Facebook should not really need to go through the repeated identity crises it seems to enjoy, as it tries to work out how to offer everything its rivals promise and more.

But, as a Silicon Valley sage once said, only the paranoid survive.

Rory Cellan-Jones Article written by Rory Cellan-Jones Rory Cellan-Jones Technology correspondent

Kickstarter - now just a store?

How Pebble's new smartwatch is taking Kickstarter by storm

Read full article

More on This Story

More from Rory


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 93.

    Google: knows what you were looking for.
    Facebook: knows who you are.
    Apple: knows what you want.

  • rate this

    Comment number 92.

    To paraphrase Hustle “those who seek something for nothing / get nothing for something” and that is the worry about how social networks draw the line between privacy and profit. Many people are willing to trade some privacy in return for a social networking service but some of the social networking services seem to almost exploit the general lack of awareness about privacy on the internet.

  • rate this

    Comment number 91.

    Twitter: " The virtual lavatory wall"
    Facebook: ""

  • rate this

    Comment number 90.

    Google+ is great as an interface but there are no regular users on it so its usefulness is stunted considerably. The one aspect I think may revive it is the 1+ feature in the search engine results. However I think inter networking site functionality will be the next major step although it will be a complicated process.

    I have to say I think Social Networking will change society. It has already.

  • rate this

    Comment number 89.

    Facebook is about group communication essentially. We use it because it has most contacts in it, not because its best. If you have nothing to say to those beyond your everyday each you won't use it. If you do you will.

    Initially there was a bit of novelty and I entertained myself with that but we are down to its basic usefulness. Cont


Comments 5 of 93



Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.