So last night I was at the Great Facebook Debate and the initial data that was in this post was my very basic notes taken from my mobile and posted straight out… Now that I’m on a proper screen and have access to a decent keyboard I’m going through and tidying up… and making the post actually readable!
The first motion of the debate was whetehr people were for or against opening up the system to apps.
Against the motion: Was the first argument and the reason for that… because of “crappy apps”… These are seen as a result of a lack of quality control and were deemed as one of the negatives of the long tail which were metaphorically turning a sink into a black hole. The other comment that was made is that this is information that you can’t get at about yourself. (something that I did consider is how does Facebook fare if you ask for your data under the Data Protection Act… This wasn’t discussed that evening either… )
For the Motion: Facebook is an attention applications platform and social network. Updates on location, availability give a context and this is seen as a platform to feed more information in a timely and concise manner… the comment of “and what next…” came up but was never expanded upon unfortunately. The comment that social apps allow single place life streams was also made by Sam Sethi.
Agains the Motion: What is the motivation behind Facebook to the business owners and the application providers, well in short Facebook are planning (apparently) to IPO next year. This means that they are disregarded their user base to expand rapidly. It also means that they are not in control of the applications being added and they are therefore spamming the users and ultimately it is the user experience that will suffer and when that happens they will move on to something else.
For the Motion: Facebook apps will make you money. This is a bubble… And if you can make silly apps and stupid people add then then you may as well make the most of getting money out of stupid people, in short… from the irish guy! It’s a con job!
Motion failed!
Motion 2 Whether or not to accept your bosses friend request.
Against: Your boss should not be on your social network, as your boss is not your friend they are your boss… and in short according to Sam Sethi “Boss stands for bag of shite”, now we are all wondering who his next boss will be 
For: Social network friends are not real friends they are contacts so you may as well add them. Undermines workplace formality and therefore adds a new communications channel.
Against: No one recognises the boss, they should be recognised, but if you accept their request then they will worry for you and care too much to do their job if you accept them. It’s all for the best if you don’t accept.
For: Change the privacy settings so that he sees only those pics that no one else sees, scare him. Aim as many of the pointless apps as you can get your hands on at them, drive them mad… Make up friends and get them to poke him… (now that sounds some what amusing but I’m sure it’s not a good idea!)
Motion failed!
Overall I found the debate some what amusing but it skirted around quite a lot of the core subjects, how to get quality into the apps, how to stop the app spam, best practice etc. There were no discussions on what the next big thing would be or whether Facebook should be doing more or less with the platform. There was also no discussion about brand marketing and revenue sharing from advertising.
It was a bit of a shame really because there were a lot of big business, marketing and technical minds in the room so the debate could have really hotted up but the subjects for debate were far too simple and irrelevant. It was a bit like asking people in a pub whether the price of beer should be less… (of course everyone agrees… other than the person trying to be different!)
About Dr Mariann Hardey
I hold the position of Lecturer in Social Media Marketing at Durham Business School. I also spend too much time enjoying social technologies, media+ stuff. That'll make me a Geek then. And a gal.
