What Made Beacon A Bust?

from the too-big-to-make-it-work dept

There's no question that Facebook's Beacon initiative has taken a beating over the past few weeks. The feature automatically collected and published users' activities at partner sites, and almost immediately attracted criticism. MoveOn launched a campaign in opposition to Beacon. Horror stories of accidentally disclosed purchases — like engagement ring purchases and Christmas presents — began to circulate. The early word was decidedly negative, prompting some partners to begin to jump ship. Facebook has weathered similar storms before: its minifeed feature was met with a hostile reception, but is now emulated by virtually every new social network. But this time they caved: on Wednesday founder Mark Zuckerberg wrote a rather contrite blog post:
We've made a lot of mistakes building this feature, but we've made even more with how we've handled them. We simply did a bad job with this release, and I apologize for it.


Last week we changed Beacon to be an opt-in system, and today we're releasing a privacy control to turn off Beacon completely.

It remains to be seen whether users will opt out en masse — there are indications that many may still not be aware of Beacon. But the negative press seems likely to scare away potential partners. So while it would be premature to declare Beacon a failure, it seems very unlikely that it will ever achieve its intended net-spanning potential.

I think there are three reasons why this happened. First, Beacon's simply not a feature that people — as opposed to companies — were clamoring for. Facebook noticed its users expressing opinions about products and saw a great opportunity to make money. But they couldn't resist removing the messily inefficient human portion of the opinion-expression process. Unfortunately, users didn't get much value from having that process automated.

Second, and perhaps most obviously, Facebook bungled the deployment of the feature. As Zuckerberg admits in the above-linked post, the company didn't think hard enough about how users would respond, and was too slow to react to how they did.

But the third factor may be the most problematic for Facebook: they're just too big. I don't mean to call MoveOn's anti-Beacon campaign dishonest, but it's not exactly in keeping with the organization's style. It's hard to imagine they'd have undertaken the effort if there wasn't plenty of free press attention to be had by attacking Facebook. The social network has achieved a level of popular attention that makes them an attractive target (and, if you subscribe to the nightclub theory of social networking, one that could presage a no-one-goes-there-because-it's-too-crowded problem).

Of course it would be silly to spend too much time doomsaying — the site's pageviews continue to grow at a healthy clip. But in the wake of the partial collapse of Beacon, it's hard to imagine Facebook launching another initiative as ambitious — and it's even harder to imagine them launching one successfully.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: advertising, beacon
Companies: facebook

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Alfred E. Neuman, 7 Dec 2007 @ 9:55am


    As with any malware, it will soon bite you in the rear.
    Too many people are clueless about software they allow to run on their machine(s).

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    Erik, 7 Dec 2007 @ 10:23am

    Facebook doesn't care about user privacy, they care about monetizing their user base to cash in (regardless of what PC-speaking Zuckerberg has to say to the contrary). There are established ways to add advertising revenue to a site, Facebook should look to those before ever considering something as stupid and invasive as Beacon again. But it doesn't matter to me as I'd never use Facebook anyway, read their Terms of Use sometime. The rights you sign over by using the site are outrageous.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 7 Dec 2007 @ 10:39am

    Facewhat? Now aren't you just glad they opened up public registration and scrapped their 'network'?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4. identicon
    matt, 7 Dec 2007 @ 10:42am

    how about opt in

    People seem to forget, they will take opt-ins when available

    but opt-outs haven't been welcome since day one and never will be, ever. I found out I had been signed for beacon and I couldn't even find the unsubscribe for quote some time.

    Why should I have to hunt for this crap? Why doesn't facebook do something interesting (like tshirts) that might be worth us spending money on them instead of bullshit (like forced advertising basically).

    It's not that peoeple don't have a voice, but they would have ignored and done beacon anyway if they felt that not enough people cared (even though most people don't even know WHERE to be vocal).

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5. identicon
    James, 7 Dec 2007 @ 11:29am

    Facebook is a crock of s--t.

    Here is a small snippet from their "About Facebook" page:
    Keep it private
    At Facebook, we believe that people should have control over how they share their information and who can see it.

    Obviously the privacy and development teams don't eat at the same tables.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 7 Dec 2007 @ 2:14pm

    isn't this system basically what double click tried to do?

    not 100% the same mechanism but exactly the same goal, i.e. tracking people and using that data for adverts.

    except here they use your data to sell to other people.

    the twist being *you* can use adblock all you like, but they still promote stuff to others.

    one of these days people will learn, if adverts annoy they don't work as well as ones that don't

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7. identicon
    Lucretious, 7 Dec 2007 @ 5:08pm

    I hope they didn't catch my purchase of a mens sized 9 stilletto heels and ......oops......never mind.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)


Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.