Facebook to Overhaul News Feed With More Content From Family and Friends, Less From Publishers

Discussion in 'iOS Blog Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jan 11, 2018.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg this afternoon announced some major changes that are coming to the Facebook News Feed, which will cut down on the content displayed from publishers to instead highlight more content from family and friends.

    According to Zuckerberg, feedback from Facebook users has suggested content from businesses, brands, and media is crowding out personal content from friends, something Facebook wants to correct. Rather than aiming to help Facebook users find relevant content, it will now help users find "meaningful social interactions."
    Zuckerberg says that it will take months to roll out the new focus to all of its products, but the first change will be coming to the News Feed, which will feature more content from family, friends, and groups. Less public content will be displayed, and what is displayed, should encourage meaningful interactions.
    Through implementing these changes, Zuckerberg expects to see engagement and the time people spend on Facebook go down, but the time that is spent on Facebook "will be more valuable." Doing the right thing, he says, will be "good for the community" and Facebook's business over the long term.

    Article Link: Facebook to Overhaul News Feed With More Content From Family and Friends, Less From Publishers
  2. farewelwilliams macrumors 68000

    Jun 18, 2014
    MAKE IT CHRONOLOGICAL BY DEFAULT. jfc i don't understand why FB/Twitter feels the need to show things out of order.
  3. tylerthomas28 macrumors member


    Feb 7, 2017
    Too little too late Zuck... Facebook is clunkier than iTunes. Glad I abandoned it when it when I did.
  4. Cougarcat macrumors 604

    Sep 19, 2003
    Seriously. Just make a dumb, chronological list of everything my friends post. That’s it.

    At least with Twitter you can fix this with a good client.
  5. Xavier macrumors 68030

    Mar 23, 2006
    So you mean the 2 and 5 item won't be a sponsored posted every time you look anymore? Seriously, facebook is 99% ads, .9% other content you don't want to see, and .1% relevant.
  6. djeeyore25 macrumors 6502


    Dec 23, 2014
    New York City
    How about an official content blocker so I can filter out all the meaningless political chatter and other nonsense? I already use Social Fixer but it doesn’t work on iOS. Knowing I can block all the useless garbage makes Facebook far more enjoyable.
  7. TMRJIJ macrumors 68030


    Dec 12, 2011
    South Carolina, United States
    They should also combine the Facebook and Messenger apps into one app. Also give us more options to get rid of useless adverts.
  8. BWhaler, Jan 11, 2018
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018

    BWhaler macrumors 68030


    Jan 8, 2003
    Sure Comrads, that’s wha’t you’ll do.

    Reminds me of McDonals. Every few years, they get backlash for their unhealthy menu, so they make some cosmetic changes promoting their salads, apples in kids meals, etc. six months later, everything back to normal.

    And none of these announcements change the cancer that is the surveillance apartus that is Facebook. They will just make some changes to make their product stink less. Who cares.

    Honestly, Facebook can’t fall fast enough to the dustbin that is Friendstr, AOL, et al.
  9. stoopkidblues macrumors 6502


    Mar 21, 2014
    Lol so making Facebook into.. Facebook? o_Oo_O

    Maybe this will give me a reason to get online again instead of just using it for logins lol
  10. OldSchoolMacGuy macrumors 601


    Jul 10, 2008
    Good deal.

    Many are too blind to see but Facebook makes changes in order to keep people coming back. Argue all you want about how much they've "ruined" it, that's not the case. The amount of time the average user spends on Facebook just continues rising. If it was as bad as you kids are claiming, that time would be dropping. Instead the data supports the opposite of your claims.

    Facebook is brilliant at bringing people back. Please offer proof otherwise if you don't believe that to be the case.
    --- Post Merged, Jan 11, 2018 ---
    The average Facebook user would see more than 1,500 updates every day in they served them in chronological order. That's just not an option. Instead they do a wonderful job of figuring out what people want to see and showing more of those updates.

    If they continued to show updates in chronological order, you'd see a bunch of garbage updates you don't care about and you'd leave the site. That would hurt their business. They're smarter than that.
    --- Post Merged, Jan 11, 2018 ---
    Having 2 separate apps increases the time you spend with both, which means more chances to make money for FB. They're not going to combine them.

    Advertising is how they make money. They're not going away.
  11. C DM macrumors Westmere

    Oct 17, 2011
    Given that they are making rather big changes to how they are serving things up and what they are serving up, seems like the "wonderful job" isn't really all that after all.

    That aside, nothing wrong with giving people an option, as they did before, to chose what they want to see and preserve it for them until they want to change it themselves.
  12. EM2013 macrumors 65816


    Sep 2, 2013
    Does this mean we’ll finally get back the “most recent” feed?
  13. C DM macrumors Westmere

    Oct 17, 2011
    It has pretty much always been there. Just not one that you can set to be the default these days.
  14. OldSchoolMacGuy macrumors 601


    Jul 10, 2008
    Each change they roll out is tested extensively before rolling out across the entire system.

    Just because they're making a change now doesn't mean the previous one didn't work. You can always continue improving even on a great system. Even the Bugatti Veyron eventually had a replacement.

    Why give people choice if you know it's only going to cause them to not use your service as much? If you were in a position where your livelihood depended on getting people to use your service as much as possible, would you honestly give people something that would jeopardize that?
  15. deferredAnon macrumors 6502


    Dec 25, 2017
  16. OldSchoolMacGuy macrumors 601


    Jul 10, 2008
    That's never coming back. Average user would see more than 1500 updates a day. No one would scroll through that and all the garbage updates would turn them off from Facebook.

    People don't realize how many stupid, pointless, updates Facebook keeps them from not seeing each day. You should be glad you don't see most of the crap that gets posted because you've made it clear through your actions on Facebook that you don't want to see it anyways.
  17. macTW Suspended

    Oct 17, 2016
    Will this lessen publishers manipulating the algorithms to get more views and likes?
  18. C DM macrumors Westmere

    Oct 17, 2011
    Well, the statements about this that were made are not selling this as an improvement over what was already great, but a major change, meaning that what is there now isn't doing as well as they would like it to be doing. Like you said, they know what they are doing, so making this pretty major shift closer to what it was like before and closer to what many people have actually been asking for seems like they figured out that it would make things better for them, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it, right?
    --- Post Merged, Jan 11, 2018 ---
    It never really left, it's still there, simply doesn't persist across sessions. Many people realize plenty of things, even if many others might not. Not everything works the same way for everyone by far.
  19. OldSchoolMacGuy macrumors 601


    Jul 10, 2008
    The current way wasn't bad for Facebook but making this change will make them even more money in two ways.

    First, it means people will see more of the stuff they want to see. They're not on there to see businesses. They want to see posts from friends and family. Now they'll get more of that, which means they'll come back even more and be exposed to even more ads, making Facebook more money.

    Secondly, it means that businesses get seen less. That means businesses will now have to pay more frequently if they want to be seen. That means more money for Facebook too.

    This doesn't say that the old setup was bad at all. It just shows they're continuing to make changes that allow them to make more and more money.
    --- Post Merged, Jan 11, 2018 ---
    They've actually done a lot around that lately. One recent change is to take action against businesses that ask for 'Likes" in their posts. Those that do now see less reach for their message.

    There are a number of other changes made to adjust how things are measured and what impacts the spread of a post from a business page.
  20. haruhiko macrumors 601


    Sep 29, 2009
    They've been throwing radical political news and blogs at my face since few years ago. Since then I have given up using Facebook.
  21. C DM macrumors Westmere

    Oct 17, 2011
    It's being touted as a major change, not as an improvement on what's there. Meaning that it's going to be different, at least in part to appeal to those who have been likely using Facebook less and less because of that. So they certainly will be doing what makes them more money, and in this case the current way wasn't going to cut it it would appear. While you can frame it in saying that it doesn't mean that the old way was bad, it also means that it isn't good either since they aren't sticking to it or improving upon it, but changing from it, and mostly in the direction of how things used to be.
  22. EM2013 macrumors 65816


    Sep 2, 2013
    It doesn’t even work.

    If I set it to most recent, the first post I see was from one hour ago, the very next post is from yesterday at 9 pm.
  23. OldSchoolMacGuy macrumors 601


    Jul 10, 2008
    If you want to think this was done because the old way was bad, go for it. I just messaged a friend who works for Facebook and he confirmed it wasn't the old way didn't work, it was simply that this one worked even better.

    In your mind, Apple release a new iOS each year because the old one was bad, not because they're looking to improve things.
  24. charlituna macrumors G3


    Jun 11, 2008
    Los Angeles, CA
    i wouldn't object to that. how about a 3 tab set up. first tab is friends, second is follows, third is messenger.

    and yes they should give us an option to not see sponsored posts and ads. I'd happy pay a small fee of say $15 a year for an ad free experience if it includes when I'm looking at an article in the built in browser.

    I'd also like to see the ability to block pages from my feed and my comments. I'm sick of spam from pages all over the place.

    and filtering by subject wouldn't be a bad thing either. I don't care to see anything about the Kardashian/Jenners for example. plus there are several times that things about movies get posted that I might not want to see until I see the movie. why not let me mute them like Twitter does. they have like 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, forever options.
    --- Post Merged, Jan 11, 2018 ---
    if that's what I want give me the option. or let me choose to see everything from my friends and the most popular from my feeds. and maybe even with options to see all the stuff from a feed together and to expand out to everything for that day/feed. with a way to mark things that I've read that I don't want to see in my feed anymore (or reduce it to just a headline to make it easier to scroll past quickly.

    lots of ways they could do it
  25. C DM macrumors Westmere

    Oct 17, 2011
    Even if the old/current way wasn't working well most who work on a product won't see it that way and it definitely won't be communicated to them that way. Makes that type of information fairly moot.

    Nothing in my mind was said or even though of in relation to iOS, and the strawman version that you bring up isn't at all what I've been talking about.

Share This Page