It seems Instagram have caused a little controversy with their new Stories feature, which many have pointed out is pretty much a copycat version of Snapchat’s own Stories feature. It allows users to create a visual diary over a 24-hour period that is only shared with a specific audience, and then disappears once the 24-hour period is over.
Instagram themselves are the first to admit that their Stories feature isn’t a totally original idea, comparing the situation to the way in which many social channels have adopted the feed feature that originally came from Facebook and the hashtag system which Twitter became renowned for – although Twitter in fact originally borrowed this from early Internet services and forums.
With all these social channels borrowing ideas and features from each other, could they possibly start to lose their unique identity and the original ideas that they were founded on?
Take Instagram for example, the mobile app was created in 2010 as a way to replicate and share ‘instant camera’ / polaroid style of photographs with an online community – using an arrange of filters to give those photos that specifically old-fashioned style.
Six years on the service is very different, allowing for more flexibility in creativity (through video functions), enhancing the desktop experience, and becoming more advertising friendly. Rather than being seen as a mere photo-sharing application, Instagram is now one of the most powerful (if not the most powerful) social networking channels available to brands. In fact the original idea of replicating old-fashioned styles of photography is being diminished, with the Normal filter (when no effect is applied to the image) being the most popularly used one.
So, are we beginning to see social channels become indistinguishable from one another, where the future will have just one all-powerful social media channel, that includes all the key features from the current crop?
“The logical thing to do for networks that are already winners in their field, is to ally with other winners and create an all-inclusive software whose function would be to direct and monetize the time you spend online”
When talking about the evolution of social media, it’s always useful to remember how incredibly fast these networks have expanded across the world. In just five years from now, Instagram will be twice as old as it is today! Social media has become so ubiquitous that we very much forget it is still in the process of shaping itself. And, by nature, it is always open for a Next Big Thing to come and disrupt it – although that looks less likely.
This winner-takes-all principle means there can be only one left standing on the field. But which field are we talking about? Social media’s function on the Internet is to keep us engaged and to maintain our attention. The focus of the main networks has shifted from creating interpersonal connections to creating exposure: your exposure to amazingly diverse but increasingly organised content. It has become pretty clear: social media’s function is to keep us online.
That is why I believe that the conditions are right for different social media networks to increasingly unify. Because their business is the same – capturing and selling attention. The logical thing to do for networks that are already winners in their field, is to ally with other winners and create an all-inclusive software whose function would be to direct and monetize the time you spend online.
Now that’s not to say we will be spending all our time on one website where all content will be unified in a single feed, far from it. Although I think Instagram and Facebook could radically integrate in the coming years – not all our online needs can be put in a single place. So yes, different platforms and aggregating sites still have a future.
But a look at the financials of social media tell a different story. What companies will pay social media for is the ability to direct customers to them, through targeted advertising, sponsored content, etc. And that ability should increasingly be monopolised by a single company, which is in all likelihood going to be Facebook.
All in all, if you consider social media as a business, the creation of a monopolistic network that succeeds in managing the way you browse the Internet does not seem like such a remote possibility.
“We still have different needs and expectations from Facebook as we do from Instagram or Twitter or Snapchat or Periscope or YouTube”
In the world of technology the word ‘convergence’ was often used to describe how in the future all our media will run through one singular device, replacing all of the other technology we own. Yet, as Henry Jenkins argues, while we are seeing content converge between different devices, we’re seeing the actual hardware become more diverse.
And in many ways this is what I believe is happening with social media. Just like the iPhone can do most of the jobs of other tech devices (surf the Internet, play videos, has games, connects people together, sends emails etc.) Facebook pretty much provides all the key services of other social channels. But we still have different needs and expectations from Facebook as we do from Instagram or Twitter or Snapchat or Periscope or YouTube.
snapchat stories are the unfiltered moments that make up your life, instagram stories are the unfiltered moments that led to your IG post
— Jeremy Leon (@jeremymleon) 3 August 2016
Granted, as social channels evolve they start to lose that key niche identity and become very similar to the other services. Yet the core function that was at the heart of each service when they were founded is still the main driver of our user habits. Twitter is still predominantly seen as a ‘reporting channel’ that gives people a snackable insight into our lives. Instagram is still about developing a personal visual identity, and Facebook is about showcasing the ‘student-esque lifestyle’ through digital means.
Do I believe that the current crop of social media channels will start to increasingly look like each other? Yeah, pretty much. Do I think that everyone will converge to one, singular social media service? No. Do I believe that brands need to think about the precise purpose of each channel, and not just replicate the same content and strategy for them all? Most definitely.
In the end, people like choice and they like the option to diversify how they present themselves through social media.