There are very successful focused business-oriented social networks. LinkedIn, for example, attracts job seekers, as does Dribbble, which bills itself as the leading destination to find and showcase creative work. Work-focused networks are thriving. Which raises the question, “Would a big media brand or a big lifestyle brand have consumer permission to found and run a tightly focused social network?”
If you remember life online before the days of Friendster, Facebook, and Myspace, this might feel familiar. Everything old is new again, as pre-Mega Social Networks, social groups would gather and collaborate in semi-private spaces that they owned, like chat rooms or forums. Over time many of these social spaces often petered out because people migrated to the bigger networks like Facebook simply because they were free to use and often easier too. Hosting and running a forum, on the other hand, takes both money and time that few people are interested in spending long-term.
I'll come right out and say it: I'm not a big fan of Instagram. And no, it's not because iOS users have had their underpants in a wad over the Android release, but because for me, it really doesn't live up to the hype. (Their new privacy-invading terms of service makes them pretty unappealing, too). Here's why, and more importantly, here are some just-as-good alternatives for Android users (and some for iOS users too!) who want to take and share photos with or without those filters that make a 5-megapixel cell phone camera look like a 70s Polaroid.
I have always loved Facebook but lately they are removing some of my posts. I only share pictures if my family, and post things to make friends laugh, recipes, whats going on in my life and my feeling. I loved the memories feature, photos, being able to accessorize my page. I don’t know which direction to turn. I don’t post political issues because I feel we all have a right to there option.
Gab has a strong commitment to ensuring freedom of expression for it's users. It is continually improving the it's usability and has a growing userbase of individuals. Unlike Twitter you get 300 characters, the ability to downvote posts and no ads. It's like Twitter before Jack become CEO again and started shadowbanning, deverifying and banning certain users for their politics. Guest • Sep 2018 • 2 agrees and 0 disagrees Disagree Agree
There’s always a risk that a network turns into a home solely for niche sites, alienating folks who are simply looking for a new home – the experiment that was (and still is) SecondLife springs to mind. Most detractors of decentralized networks say that they’re too niche, and maybe a bit too nerdy, to ever catch on enough to supplant something like Facebook. Really though, only time will tell.
If all that has you thinking about deleting Facebook entirely, you're far from alone. (Quitting the social network is also somewhat of a first-world privilege, since for many people Facebook functions as the entire internet itself.) But going cold turkey can be hard; Facebook actually provides useful services sometimes, and there's no one-for-one replacement.
Twitter profiles can be customized with photos and headers. Users are also able to follow other Twitter users. Many famous people use the platform to communicate with the masses. Twitter has also become a source for news. During the 2016 United States election, more than 40 million tweets were sent about election results. One of the reasons Twitter is so popular in this regard is that breaking news can be conveyed immediately. It can often be tweeted faster than it can be reported by major news outlets.