Any business that relies on ads is a 2-sided market. And ads-sales sides of all businesses, be they paper magazines/newspapers, city public transit, or social media, are the same. They attract the same kind of sales/marketing ops people, who operate under the same moral hazards.
Conversation
What determines whether or not the product side gets captured, subverted, and undermined by the product side is a function of revenue share and the conceptual integrity of the product itself, which is a function of the simplicity of the function.
2
10
Transit systems may sell ads on vehicles, but also have ticket revenue, tax subsidies, and a strong and simple product conceptually — get you from A to B. It’s not that managers of transit systems are any more noble. The product is simply less susceptible to capture by ads.
2
14
Ads are not just the default business model, but the product design’s null hypothesis. If you don’t have a strong design intent the intent will get eaten by into selling ads. To the extent Google has a cleaner design intent (search experience) it has been captured less.
3
11
This so-called wall in old media was an illusion of ethicality even when it was intact and hadn't been eroded by tech. The moral mazes simply gravitated a level or two up. Cf. Chomsky Manufacturing Consent, regulated Big 3 TV, etc.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @vgr
Media co's used to have a wall between product and business… might that be appropriate here for the same reasons?
1
3
Good point, but ads are uniquely uncorrelated to almost any core nominal function. In most non-ad businesses, the primary revenue driver is aligned well with the primary design intent of the function being offered.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @vgr
Where in tech is any division strong enough to resist capture by the primary revenue drivers?
I see this a lot in infrastructure and platform teams — a Red Queen’s race to keep budget and roadmap from being subverted.
Maneuvers are key to maintaining agency if only temporarily.
2
11
To be clear there definitely seem to be pockets of malice, and specific processes and groups that are explicitly run in malicious ways. But it's par for the course for any company that size, new or old. But the emergent presence is incompetent rather than malicious.
1
6
Replying to
Could you fix these problems with introduction of clear ad-free subscription model with enhanced privacy protections? Think of how Netflix and Apple to an extent have moved further along the product side of things vs the ads?
1
Replying to
I don't think so. I'm skeptical of subscription models generally. I think they're a bit of a bubble that will go bust soon.
1
Replying to
I'm not arguing for widespread adoption. I'm just asking for them to offer a choice. That way there is more thorough cost/ benefit analysis in the product vs sales debate
1
Replying to
Might happen, though I'm doubtful. Subscription introduces fundamentally different cultural DNA. But it works for streaming TV, so there's reason to be optimistic.
Replying to
Apple has no significant social media property though. So it's a free strategic option for them. Also explains their doubling down on privacy and legal battles with Fortnite etc. It's basically free and even profitable for them to care about this stuff.
1
1
Show replies



