I don’t want Facebook to choose what I see in my feed. Anything less than 100% of the posts from the people and pages I choose to follow and Like amounts to censorship. I’ve had enough of Facebook games both as an owner of a personal profile and a business (fan) page. Have you? Don’t know what I’m talking about? Maybe you should.
In Defense of Facebook
I’m truly amazed at how many folks defend Edgerank and the actions of Facebook. As an example, this post by Mike on PostRocket about What’s Going on with Your Facebook Page Reach states: “While it is true that Facebook changed their algorithm, they did this to improve user experience by providing users with content that they’re more likely to engage with. Sorry to break this news, but most brand pages are awful– so obviously they will be part of the group that loses visibility in the Newsfeed.”
This sort of statement infuriates me. It’s tantamount to endorsing censorship based on an unpublicized set of criteria.
The fact is, only an average of 20% of the posts made by business pages are seen by the people who specifically elected to see those posts.
That means that you are missing 80% of what you told Facebook you wanted to see. And, Facebook has decided they know what’s best for you to see and chooses for you instead. That’s censorship.
I’ve seen others who make their living from Facebook, such as social media coaches and graphic artists, also defend Facebook’s policies and tactics. Hey, you don’t bite the hand that feeds you, right? But, if you’re a page owner struggling to build an audience on Facebook only to have it reduced to one quarter, you may tend to not be so keen on these tactics.
My User Experience
So, how does Facebook decide what I might find worthy of reading? Certainly not the people and pages I engage with most. In fact, I see lots of posts from the pages I engage with least and miss posts from those I engage with all the time.
And how exactly do they determine what is worthy? If I Like a page, then it’s worthy of reading to me.
My Facebook user experience should be based on my choices. Period.
Anything less than showing me 100% of what I Like amounts to censorship.
Facebook is the only social media platform that does not show me all of the posts from the people I choose to follow.
Undisclosed Rules
Facebook has never disclosed exactly how Edgerank works. And, they never will, just like Google will never tell you exactly how they rank websites either.
The really sad part is that users Like a page and don’t realize they are not seeing 100% of the posts from that page and there’s nothing they can do about it.
Even if Edgerank is supposed to key on engagement, if folks aren’t seeing the posts, they have no way to engage.
Facebook encourages businesses to create pages and encourage folks to follow them. There are lots of pages following pages, but those numbers don’t count in statistics. I wonder if their engagement counts in Edgerank. My guess is no.
Facebook as a Poor News Source
I can’t count on Facebook to let me see the posts of the pages I follow. Some of those folks report news I need to know. I also subscribe to their blog’s RSS feed. But, most of the time folks break news on social media and blog about it later. Subsequently, I must follow them on G+ and Twitter, or even LinkedIn and hope they post the same info there.
Follow the Money
Facebook rolled out promoted post options to business pages a few months ago. You could always buy ads, but promoted posts were supposed to simply increase the posts’ Reach inside the feed. But, folks who have done it state the Reach was not as high as promised.
Wait a second. First they throttle how many fans see the page’s post, then they make the page owner pay for them to be seen? And then it doesn’t work as well as advertised?
What’s up with that?
And now Facebook is offering promoted posts on personal profiles. For $7 you can now advertise one friend to another. Really? Okay, so you’re having a yard sale, or your kid is raising money for their school. I hope that’s all I ever see promoted, but I bet it won’t be, especially since some folks are using their personal profiles for business, which is in violation of Facebook’s TOS.
We’re Not Stuck with This
Facebook is not the only social media platform available. My ROI for the BlogAid business page tanked on Facebook last year. I’ve been spending a LOT more time on LinkedIn and glad for it. Business is booming. Now I’m spending more time on G+ and search engine results have markedly improved.
I don’t have to pay to ensure that all of those who follow me
on LinkedIn and G+ see my posts.
But, there aren’t as many users on LinkedIn and G+, and there’s the rub.
Show Me the Money Until it Hurts
Facebook is the only social platform that is attempting to extract money directly from its users that have free accounts. But, until that hits the masses, they won’t feel enough pain to go through the trouble of moving elsewhere.
For the past three years Facebook has been rife with privacy issues and buggy rollouts. Even those weren’t enough to make people move elsewhere.
When users start seeing ads and promoted posts in their Facebook news feed maybe they will begin to feel the need to move to another platform.
As a business page owner, I’ve already been feeling the pain of Facebook games. And because of that, as a user, I know exactly how much I’m missing on my personal profile.
At first, Aunt Lucy and your best buddy across the country weren’t on Facebook. But, eventually most of the people you want to keep in touch with got on board. If you move elsewhere, like to G+, other folks will come too.
What’s Down the Road
Maybe Facebook will start offering a split of free and premium accounts. With the free account, they’ll only show you a fraction of what you Liked and your news feed will be full of ads and promoted posts. Oh, wait, that’s what you have now.
What Every Site Owner Should Know could save you hundreds of dollars and months of frustration. Free with subscription to BlogAid News.
Agreed, but what’s the alternative? None? G+ gives me no traffic although I do use it, out of obligation.
I know what you mean Shelley. But, until there is a public backlash, or enough folks leaving, this will only get worse.
Yes, it’s a poor tactic to encourage a business to build an audience on your site and then tell them it will cost to show them what they’ve elected to see.
We do have a choice, we can chose to go elsewhere. Can’t wait to see the new MySpace, it may be worth a look and G+ has always worked well when my circles have been maintained.
Sarah, as a business page owner, I don’t mind paying for ads on Facebook. As someone with a personal profile who Likes pages, I do mind not seeing all of their posts. And, in both cases, I mind shady and sneaky practices. It took a lot of folks screaming out about the privacy issues for FB to retreat a little on them. But, it hasn’t stopped them from sneaking other ones in on occasion. Let’s have some transparency and clear rules of the road.
Well said, MaAnna. I maintain a presence on all three platforms, but get very little traction. I hope my new and improved website (thanks to you) will change that.
I’ve been booted off Facebook for the 2nd time (after 1st time I got a different Facebook username) for opposing US policy towards Israel. The State Dept. has an ambassador monitoring “anti-semitic” posts on Facebook and she doesn’t like me because I’m for Palestine Liberation by any means necessary and I’m also for disestablishment of Israel. UN had no moral right to take Palestinian land and give it to the Jews.
I’m rude, and I’m confrontational, but REAL Facebook censorship just makes the US less free than it already is.
I’m looking for a truly free social site where the site itself censors NOTHING. Of course I’m OK with users unfriending other users who offend their sensibilities.
Edgerank hid many of my Facebook posts because of the anti-Israel political content. Is there any other social site that doesn’t censor at all?
Bob, I almost marked your posts as spam, but didn’t only so I could reply. First, Twitter and G+ don’t censor, try them. Second, put your real name, your real email address, and a real picture of yourself on your profile. Stop hiding behind hotmail and a generic gravatar. That’s part of what is contributing to folks thinking you’re online presence is spam related. Edgerank is affecting everyone’s posts, not just those based on political content. My suggestion would be to be as rude as you like on your own platforms if that what suits you and to not use the comment sections of other people’s sites as your political platform. If you do that on your own site and they kick you off, then that’s them censoring you. If you do that on other people’s sites and they block you, well, that’s up to them. But, if you get blocked enough, you’ll get banned from the platform. There is nothing preventing you from getting your own self-hosted site and saying what you think about the situation on it.
My real name is Robert A(llen) Stump. Bob is a nickname for Robert. Some of my family members still call me Bobby.
I’m anti-Zionism and a few years back some Jews found out where I worked — and got me fired.
So don’t come off so self-righteous to me.
I’m 62 years old and don’t care to share a picture with you. Again, Jews attempted to get my picture and phone number a few years back so that they could harass me in real life.
I’m looking into going to Safebook or another P-to-P platform, and don’t need you trying to tell me what to do.
In the early 2000s I got banned from probably more than a dozen Yahoo Groups for being as rude to Jews as they were to me.
Apparently my previous Facebook identity Bob Stump (no alias) was deleted.
We really need other social site . Twitter and G+ are maybe not censoring but Twitter is dull and G+ is slow, not loading and its so complicated – just my opinion.
Agreed, Sandra. I lost my love of Twitter a couple of years ago when it became such an echo chamber. I’m active on G+, and I think it’s important for site owners to post there due to the way Rich Snippets work, but there’s still not much engagement. G+ would have been really cool if Google had done a better job with the release and let more folks on at first.