Our LocationsSocial network suicide
by Piers Guilar
Had enough of life online? Whilst there are over
500 million active users of Facebook alone, a growing proportion of consumers are completely removing themselves from social networking sites. They are concerned that all this time 'living' online is posing a threat to their offline, real lives. Many argue, for instance, that the information online reveals too much to current and even future employers. Others claim the time spent building a virtual life takes away from the traditional relationship-building that occurs face-to-face. People are committing online suicide with the help of companies such as Seppukoo, (a form of Japanese ritual suicide, actually spelled seppuku), which helps users delete their Facebook profiles and the Web 2.0 Suicide Machine, which helps you "completely do away with your Web 2.0 alterego" by deleting all of your social networking profiles.
Initially, Facebook fought these companies offering assisted suicide, even going so far as to send cease and desist letters in late 2009 and into 2010.
Not surprisingly, Seppukoo responded with its own letter to Facebook stating that it would not comply. Despite the fact that there has been little to no activity on the Seppukoo website as of late, Facebook continues to grapple with ways to satisfy members’ privacy concerns.
You may recall that in May the organization announced the introduction of simpler and more powerful controls for sharing personal information.
These efforts, in combination with Facebook's recent milestone, seem to suggest that the nearly 1.1 million social suicides claimed by the Web 2.0 Suicide Machine and Seppukoo were not enough to thwart the organization’s influence on people and brands all over the world.
So what's next for the network? In a recent article by The Guardian, Gartner analyst, Monica Basso, deems Facebook “the mother of all social networks.” Basso goes on to say that, "By 2012, Facebook will become the hub for integration of social networks, as well as for social extensions of traditional websites and applications. Other social networks, including Twitter, will continue to develop, seeking further adoption and specialisations with communication or content areas, but Facebook will represent a common denominator for all of them."
Do you agree with Ms. Basso, or does the mere thought of a more dominant Facebook indulge your social suicide?
Piers Guilar is a group director for the Siegle+Gale London office.
Contact us
North America
625 Avenue of the Americas, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10011 USA
10960 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90024 USA
Middle East
Loft Office 408, Building 2C
P.O. Box 502835
Dubai Media City, United Arab Emirates
Asia
No. 29 ShaJing Road, Building 5
Hongkou District, Shanghai 200080, China
6/F, Tower B, Jiaming Center
No. 27 Dongsanhuan Beilu
Chaoyang District, Beijing 100020, China
Pingback: E-bike
Pingback: Five Ways To Make A Second Income From Home (Ever Hear Of Social Media Manager?)
Piers – Nice and short. It poses two interesting points to me
1. Who are these people that commit e-harikari (copyright JC, but I’ll let you use it) –> I’d like to segment the customers,
2. Once they remove themselves online what happens to their offline world? Does it improve, worsen or stay the same…
I would imagine the answer to 1 is a very small group, and to 2 = nothing, especially if your offline social group is also still online. For me the most important thing is not offline vs online but how the two are supposed to compliment each other, and actually make friendship richer. See Marketing Week this week with the article about Facebook starting its own online currency (Facebook $ or similar) which can be used for virtual goods initially but then physical goods with retailers such as amazon for example. Using its critical mass, Facebook can become more than a mere social networking site (quite scary).
I think there is scope for you to write a post about the behemoth brands of web 2.0. Google is a good example. It purports to be an online champion, offering everything for free, however this is just a veneer. It manipulates markets for its own gain, while surfing on this wave of optimism, openness and freedom. When actually it is the opposite, restricting competition, choice for the user etc. Facebook is just another example.
Have you been reading a bit of Rene’s finest?
Is this all like a game of civilisation? A noticeboard pointing to routes of interest or gain?
Ben
Very interesting article. You have managed to precis all of the recent article on facebook and make it snappy yet informative.
Well Done
Great post Piers!
I think Facebook needs to be careful with its privacy or they may risk regulation. But I do think that privacy will, in the near future, not be such a big deal with the rise and demand in transparency. However, I think what Facebook has created in terms of a dominant and accepted form of digital interaction, both between customers and brands, is what’s so profound. Whether it be on Facebook or another social platform, that is something that won’t go away, and I believe will become more dominant in the coming years.