Once again Facebook has updated its algorithms to the detriment of the visibility of the pages and the benefit of personal profiles . buy youtube views The initial intention without a doubt is to clean Facebook of false news, hoaxes and linked messages, which have always flooded the social network (and other messaging).
The improvement of the algorithm allows the feed to show or not determined content depending on how each user acts. One of the examples in this constant improvement of algorithm is the announcement made in 2014 by Mark Zuckerberg’s company, which showed the importance of reducing or even preventing Clickbait content.
Although the objective content is of interest, it is abusing hook phrases of the style “This guy has done such a thing and you will not believe what happened next” This type of headlines seems to be tiring users, who are forced to leave the social network to obtain more information. To combat clicbait they only have one variable: the time the user stays on the page after clicking on the link.
The clickbait is just the tip of the iceberg. Facebook is already filtering more fraudulent content, such as hoaxes, false news, etc. Enhancing the positioning in the news feed to those that really are of interest to the majority of users and eliminating from the positioning those news that do not interest the least or even that are considered as ‘Fakes’.
The spam filter has also been improved, and the algorithm is identifying those pages whose publications are being considered spam. The more spam a page makes, the lower its visibility in the users’ news feed.
Changes for the benefit of the user (and Facebook)
Of course all these changes are aimed at improving the user experience in the social network. But, not only benefits users, but Facebook also comes out very benefited, and not only as a social network, but also as a business.
Users will soon see news of their friends and acquaintances before a Facebook page. The news of the ‘friends’ will be positioned more than those of the companies we follow. This means that brands lose great visibility and to compensate for this loss of visibility, in addition to investing in quality content they must also invest in Facebook Ads, thus benefiting the large social network economically.
Content specialization
Some brands have chosen to increase the number of pages specializing in content of a very specific theme, which ends up attracting users who want to consume very specific content.
This implies that these pages have greater visibility on the basis that their users are continually finding very specific content of interest and that they most likely share. If the content is shared, the brand will be appearing in the news feeds of the friends of these users. This practice is increasingly widespread and therefore pages like ‘Cabronazi’, ‘Tasty’, ‘The Huffington Post’, ‘BuzzFeed’, among many others, have multiplied in a series of “Spin-offs” with very specific themes .
Let’s give an example:
Suppose we are a brand of DIY tools (drills, saws …). The normal thing would be to have a page for the brand, but the contents would be so varied that they would not always interest all users equally.
The strategy of the “Spin-offs” could be to have a page for each type of tool. For example “EKS Mark Drill Tips” “EK Mark Saw Tips” or “DIY with wood – Mark Equis”, “DIY with metal – Mark Equis”, “Garden Tips – Mark EK” and a long etc. that would offer very specific contents.
In this way the follower of “Garden Tips – MarcaEquis” in a generic page most of its contents would not be interesting, because maybe it does not work the wood, does not have a drill, or does not work the metal. But following a page with specific content, you know you will find that type of content that you are interested in. Very surely all the content of the page will be of your interest and therefore will be better positioned in your news feed.
Is this strategy ethical?
This strategy is ethical if its objective is to benefit both parties (user and brand). The user must receive information and content of quality, specific and in accordance with the specialized page. The brand in turn will gain visibility.
It will cease to be ethically acceptable when the quality of the content harms the user, making him waste his valuable time bombarding it with spam, deceptive publications, clicbait or contents of dubious or null quality. Since this only benefits one of the parties, the brand that gains visibility to the detriment of the quality of the content for the user.
So brands can resort to this strategy as long as their goal is to offer quality content and interest to their users.
An uncertain future
The abuse of this strategy with unethical purposes, can lead to Facebook taking action in the medium and long term, creating new filters and changes in its algorithm that prevent the pages use this type of strategy. This will hurt the brands again.
What strategy do you consider the most annoying in Facebook? Do you think that the quality of the content has degenerated in recent times?