Follow Us

DMN on Feedburner
Connect with:
divider image

Don’t Let Facebook Hide Your Page Updates…

Old News

Yes, Facebook has confirmed that they are hiding your posts on your followers’ newsfeeds.

Facebook says that text updates posted by Pages don’t inspire users like posts from actual friends.  Because of this, Facebook is reducing the number of Page updates on newsfeeds.

“Page admins can expect a decrease in the distribution of their text status updates.”

Photos, videos, and links won’t be filtered in the same way as text-based messages.  From now on, you should embed links like the example below to avoid filtering:

Screen shot 2014-01-22 at 12.22.28 PM

Image by @Doug88888, licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0).

blue bar background graphic
Comments (6)
  1. jw

    On this topic, when a user has liked an artist on fb, they can hover over the “liked” button & choose “get notifications” from the dropdown, & they’ll receive notifications whenever the page is updated, rather than having to watch for stuff in his or her feed. This is a pretty heavy handed workaround for the feed issues… I only subscribe to a venue & a couple of my favorite artists. But most fb users don’t even know that this feature exists.

    If you’re an artist who is pretty conservative with fb posts, it might be worthwhile to let your fb fans know that this is an option.


    Reply
      1. jw

        If it were only that simple. lmao.

        Wouldn’t bet the house on that one, partner.


        Reply
        1. Faza (TCM)

          It might well be…

          Currently there are two reasons to be on Facebook:
          1. To engage with your friends who are there
          2. To receive updates from groups and pages

          Number 2 is largely dependent on number 1, because the only reason to use Facebook as a means of mass communication is that the people you want to broadcast to are already there. If they are not and they end up logging into Facebook simply to see whether there are any updates (I count myself among such people these days), the channel becomes troublesome – someone may have neglected to check it and thus missed an important piece of information.

          The move being discussed now is to limit the usefulness of Facebook as a means of broadcasting information, which pretty much leaves number 1 as the sole reason to use Facebook.

          Facebook’s current position stems from the fact that there are a lot of people on Facebook and most of those people are there because that’s where their friends ended up. At the same time, if your immediate circle of acquaintances either shuns Facebook altogether or has ceased to use it with any regularity (as I have), you have less and less reason to use it yourself. Once your usage goes down or stops, those of your friends still on there will in turn have less reason to use it.

          As the number of active users decreases, so will the usefulness of Facebook as a mass-communication platform (number 2), regardless of how they shape their ToS.

          In other words, the people on Facebook are the only real asset Facebook has and it is one they cannot control. Moreover, the more they try to monetize this asset, the less attractive their service becomes both to prospective and current users. To date, we’ve seen this happen with other social networks, who’ve lost their user-base to Facebook and we might thus be lulled into a false sense of certainty, because there doesn’t appear to be a viable competitor.

          However, it is also possible that people may simply be growing tired of social networking altogether and may abandon it for completely different modes of keeping in touch with each other. In that case, Facebook may die without a successor.


          Reply
          1. jw

            This is a case of brands supposing they have more influence than they actually do. Very few people, if any at all, come to Facebook in order to get marketed to. So your #2 is almost entirely dependent on #1. That’s how it always ever was, & it’s not going to hurt Facebook going forward.

            This extends far beyond artists. Artists who are upset about this development are a tiny, tiny, tiny piece of the Facebook pie. Facebook has always been “meh” about artists, they are much smarter than MySpace, who put all of their eggs in that basket. Facebook knew not to. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Facebook learned. Facebook has consciously stayed away from catering to artists, & when everyone was saying, “Why doesn’t FB pimp out artist pages?? Why are music players relegated to tabs?? Etc.,” it’s because FB had specific plans for it’s own growth that were bigger and more deeply rooted than MySpace’s.

            Right before Facebook went public, I think it was General Motors who came out & said, “We’re not buying any more Facebook ads, because why would we pay for ineffective ads that users are blind to when our more effective, more engaging posts show up in our target demo’s stream?” Facebook essentially said (without saying it), “Just you wait.” Because people might “like” Chevrolet trucks, but users aren’t getting butt hurt because there’s fewer Chevrolet marketing messages showing up in their stream. If Chevrolet wants to market to the captive audience of Facebook users, they’ll pay for it like any other advertiser would. Facebook has been building towards this, & spectators & pundits just haven’t picked up on it. And that’s why FB is trading @ almost $55, more than 50% over their IPO of $38, and climbing. The same people who were rooting for FB to fail before the IPO are the ones STILL rooting for FB to fail, & those people aren’t to be taken seriously.

            Any model predicting Facebook’s fall based on the performance of previous social networks is to be laughed at. It’s just not that simple. Facebook is smart. Smarter than the pundits on the finance shows. Smarter than the folks who lost money in the housing bust. Worlds smarter than the folks who lost money in the dot com bust. Smarter than the guys who did this (non peer-reviewed) “study.” And smarter than folks on comment boards across the internet predicting some inevitable decline.

            Facebook is a lot of people’s only connection to people they knew 20 or 30 years ago. Facebook has replaced photo albums for a lot of people. These aren’t trivial things. Facebook has matured, which MySpace never did, & to suggest some mass exodus without some replacement is nothing more than wishful thinking. Social networking isn’t novel, & Facebook has gone to great lengths to keep it from being novel, apps aside. People may get tired of social GAMING, but social networking is the internet equivalent of what we do in real life. People aren’t going to just up & get tired of keeping up with and keeping in contact with the people they know, & the internet isn’t going away any time soon. As long as that cross section exists, Facebook will be a major player.

            Most people offering an opinion (not only here, but everywhere) just don’t get what Facebook is doing.


            Reply
  2. Joshua Hall

    I suspect the real reason they are doing this is to try to force us to promote posts. FB even applies percentages to how much better certain posts are than others with a nice little option to promote it. FB is one slice of what we need to worry about as artists, but the email list and website is still the best way to reach your real fans.

    peace,


    Reply

Leave a Reply

Connect with:


+ two = 3

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

  1. OUR SPONSORS

  2.  
  3. Most Heated!