Facebook and Twitter: The Web 2.0 Stars
Monday, March 2, 2009 at 9:58PM A defining characteristic of Web 2.0 is the bidirectional nature of communication. Rather than users simply reading and consuming content from websites, Web 2.0 is all about users being able to contribute back ratings, comments, and other content. During those early days of Web 2.0, my team built a system that depended on ratings, comments, and content contributions. I was pretty disappointed when I looked at the rates of contribution from users until I looked at the rest of the industry. Despite all the hype about this characteristic of Web 2.0, actual statistics for sites like Wikipedia, Digg, and Flickr were initially pretty disappointing too with contribution percentages with values that were less than one percent.
It took Facebook and Twitter to drive dramatic increases in individual contribut
ions. In fact, the primary actions users take in these systems are to contribute. I've polled friends on Facebook and people who follow me on Twitter and 
have developed the following model of contribution. People feel the most comfortable contributing on Facebook because they know it is only their friends and colleagues reading and viewing. Twitter is next but most people have friends and strangers too following them there so they are still reasonably comfortable contributing but less so than Facebook. Commenting on blogs, in comparison, is considered in third position feeling less personal and intimate.
If you have any thoughts on this and don't find this space too impersonal, feel free to contribute to the discussion using the commenting mechanism on this blog.
Reader Comments (7)
Sometimes I am more reluctant to contribute to Facebook BECAUSE of the fact that I know it is my friends and collegues seeing it. On twitter, it's mostly people I don't know. In a way, I guess you could say I care less about what people on Twitter would think?
I'm not sure if people feel most comfortable contributing on Facebook because they know it's *only* their friends viewing.
In my experience, people feel comfortable with Facebook because it's the only place their friends are viewing. I've had a blog for quite some time, been on Flickr since the beginning and have been twittering for awhile - but 99% of my friends never see this content because they don't visit those sites.
So, if I want to reach my closest friends, Facebook is the way to go.
Thanks for your comments. Both of you are pointing out how you differentiate between Facebook and Twitter with regard to type of audience, with Facebook being the place where your friends are. I'd like to suggest that regardless of type of audience, you likely contribute more to Facebook and Twitter than you do to any other Web 2.0 site. We all contribute the most to these two sites even though we contribute different material largely determined by the type of audience viewing each.
Twitter is not going to work for me. Facebook is much more interactive and since I work in a large highly socially oriented and intertwined community the feedback on facebook regarding dates,meetings,events,news,community etc.meets my needs much better.
If Twitter had apps where followers were directed as to fields of interest or specialization it might be more applicable to me since then I could benefit from insights by others in my field even though they may be strangers to me.
Mind you I work in the field of sports and leisure where client connection is of utmost importance. I do see the value of Twitter in a more fast paced environment but it just won't be relevant for me.
I believe you are right Karel about Facebook and Twitter being the stars. I don't know many people at all making use of the others. Cheers. Libby Keenan
I post on Facebook and Twitter because I feel I get more back for what I put in. Meaning, if I contribute there, I know that many people will read and it and potentially discuss it. Other sites don't have the same readership of my material or conversation around it, so I don't like to use much of my time writing there. More bang for your buck on FB & Twitter with a guaranteed personal audience.
In all honesty, I contribute very little content to Facebook. Facebook is filled with people I now personally, but they come from all walks of life and have very little in common with me. I use it to keep in touch, but that's about it. With Twitter and Flickr, I'm connected with people who share a common interest. At the moment, that's more compelling for me.
However, I can understand why most people share a lot of content with Facebook - for many people, this is the only social networking site they visit. In my experience, once you get outside the web/tech/media world, usage of social media drops off dramatically and Facebook is the only obvious exception.
I think the secret to Facebook's success was the tools they put in place to help users find one another (by network, by employment history, school history, hometown...). Finding people to connect with is the most difficult aspect of social media and Facebook made it much easier.
I agree on the relevance of Facebook. We work on dialogue initiatives and cross-sector partnerships. Twitter looks more like a fast-sharing space that is useful for getting quick responses but sometimes you need to intimate a little bit more in order to dig better in deep thouhgts.