Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Mad Dawgg
I don't need to prove anything, the fact that the market undervalued it showed that it didn't have much of a use value.

FB is a social tool, it has very little use in other areas.

The Teaparty could have found other venues.

There is nothing about FB that is not irreplaceable and that goes for twitter as well.

Internet websites and blogs broke the MSM monopoly on the news, not FB.

46 posted on 05/28/2012 2:59:24 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: fortheDeclaration
"The Teaparty could have found other venues."

I see Explain how then. While you are fumbling for some BS answer I'll explain the real reason why.

We've had the world wide web for over 20 years yet nothing as powerful as the Tea Party emerged before Facebook and Twitter. And the reason is simple. Facebook and Twitter are akin to anyone having the power of an entire Primetime TV network.

See Facebook and Twitter are not webpages someone has to find by searching. They are platforms that form a true network. Not one that broadcasts only one direction either but a network that broadcasts in multi-directions.

Zuckerberg and company built a College Social Network BUT it was morphed into one of the most powerful information sharing platforms history has ever witnessed.

When the Tea Party movement started it was a few individuals using these platforms to share info and like a snowball rolling downhill it grew exponentially and efficiently because of the way these platforms are designed. The only platform that came close to doing such before is MySpace and it was buggy beyond belief and still didn't have the power of how individuals link up like Twitter and FB.

Obama won the election because he used these platforms to organize young voters.

"Internet websites and blogs broke the MSM monopoly on the news, not FB."

And this statement proves you have no clue on the difference between webpages/blogs and FB/twitter. See Webpages/blog still must be run through a search engine to spread the message to new people. And those SE's are controlled by outside entities who decide how these pages get ranked. And they are still in essence a one way communication unless you setup chatroom/BB's and such BUT even then its not networked with other webpages/blogs.

See FB/Twitter are like internets within the internet and once you hookup you have the same info sharing power as everyone else. This is the difference. You don't need someone to rank your site and hope you don't end up on page ten of a search instead your info you share can spread across the platform instantly by individuals hitting the share and like buttons.

This is the difference and it is so subtle yet powerful. Will something come along and replace these platforms? of course but I guarantee they will do so by doing what FB and Twitter does now but better. Facebook twitter doesn't work like that.

52 posted on 05/28/2012 5:32:27 PM PDT by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson