[Infowarrior] - Social Networks, from the 80s to the 00s

[Richard Forno]

 Social Networks, from the 80s to the 00s
Guest Column, Sunday, January 20, 2008 at 12:00 AM PT Comments (3)

http://gigaom.com/2008/01/20/social-networks-from-the-80s-to-the-00s/

Written by Brian McConnell

As Facebook enjoys its moment in the sun, we should take a moment to step
back and look at the history of computers and social communication. Some
historical perspective is in order, both to assess the real value of social
networks as businesses, and to anticipate how they are likely to evolve in
the future.

I¹ve been using the Internet since 1988, and have been using various
commercial online services such as CompuServe, Prodigy and GEnie since I had
my first computer. A lot of things that could be described as social
networks have come and gone in that time.

Bulletin Boards

People have been using computers for social communication since the very
beginning of the personal computer industry. Long before the Internet became
accessible to the general public, people were hosting BBS systems, many of
them focused on an interest group or local community. One particularly
prescient invention was FidoNet, a network for BBSes that allowed systems to
transfer data (messages, files, etc.) in bucket-brigade fashion to sites
around the world. It grew to, at one point, cover much of the world, and was
an entirely community-based effort.

Since not everyone had a computer , the communities that emerged in the BBS
world largely revolved around computers in some way. Some BBSes focused on
DIY computer projects, others on games, and more than a few were devoted to
pirating commercial software.

Online Services

Commercial online services reached their peak in the 1990s, first as
destinations in of themselves, and later as a way to access the Internet.
These services provided access to a broad range of services that are now
mirrored on the web. News, travel reservations, shopping and social hubs
were all part of the package; much of what we see today on the web existed
in some form on these sites. Social communication was one of the big draws
for online services, as a major source of their revenue was derived from
billing for usage on a per-minute basis. AOL in particular recognized this
and allowed users to create communities about just about any topic.

Just as online services were reaching their peak, the web became accessible
to ordinary users, turning the Internet into a mainstream phenomenon. Online
services, in turn, gradually morphed from destinations to a means of
accessing the Internet.

Throughout this period, the population of computer users expanded rapidly.
AOL, for all of its faults, deserves a lot of credit for introducing
millions of people to the Internet. As the user community grew, online
services began to build communities around more diverse interest groups,
most having nothing to do with computers. The community focus shifted from
computers to people who happened to use computers to do something.

Web 1.0

>From the mid-90s to 2000, there was an explosion of activity as companies
rushed to reproduce existing online services on the web. There were many
social services created during this period, notably GeoCities and
theGlobe.com. One thing the web did was to eliminate the walled garden
problem that plagued AOL and their brethren. This promoted the development
of niche communities, such as PlanetOut/Gay.com, that may have otherwise
been stifled by corporate censorship in controlled environments. While none
of these services advertised themselves as a social network per se, they had
many of the same characteristics.

Friendster

Friendster deserves special mention because it was the first popular web
site that contained all of the features we expect from social networks today
‹ especially the notion of using a social graph to track relationships. But
was an unfortunate example of being too early in a developing market.
Everything I have seen since Friendster is highly influenced by it, and
generally offers the same basic features, just in a different package.

The Future

While I think commercial social networks will continue to be popular, it is
dangerous to project future growth from past trends. There are several
important trends already underway that, while they are good for social
networking as a whole, will undermine proprietary commercial services.

Commercial social networks today are a lot like online services in the
mid-90s ‹ they¹re popular because they make something easier to do (maintain
a social graph, keep track of friends, search for new people). It was not
that long ago when getting online was difficult for novice users. Large
businesses (EarthLink, Netcom, AOL) were built around making the Internet
easy to use. They became superfluous as broadband became standard and
devices with built-in Net access were shipped.

I think the same thing is likely to happen to social networks, so let¹s look
at what a social network really does, and think about how that can be
implemented on the open web.

Profiles

Social networks make it easy for people to create profiles using standard
templates. This makes sense, but this is really no different than a web
page. I like what Chris Messina and co. are doing with their distributed
social networking project, which uses blogs as a basic building block, and
microformats to embed metadata in pages. Separating profiles from other
functions, like search and discovery, makes a lot of sense because then you
can have one page or site that is visible via many different search tools.

Search (and the Social Graph)

The social graph is a function that can easily be added to search engines.
Once web sites, blogs, etc. are tagged to indicate that they are profiles,
search engines can crawl them to pick up metadata, links to friends, etc.
Search engines are already good at indexing the web, so adding a vertical
search for people and social information is not a daunting task. Expect the
search engines to add social/people search features. While the conventional
wisdom holds that this task will naturally fall to Google, I think this is
an area where AOL or Yahoo could score an unexpected win, as both companies
are much more people- and community-focused.

Updates

One of the reasons Facebook is so addictive is because it is a convenient
way to track the status of friends. This, too, is something that can be
moved onto the open web. Anyone who wants to can publish updates, events,
etc. via standard formats like RSS and iCal. Anyone who wants to monitor
their friend¹s updates can do so, via a feed reader, or via custom
applications that have yet to be built. If this becomes standard practice,
there will be many opportunities for software developers to create new and
better ways to track and display this information.

Follow The Money

To many, social networking is a winner-takes-all market. But I don¹t think
that¹s the case. With the three pieces above, you can recreate what any
social network does using open standards and the web. At the moment, this
requires more effort, so people use commercial services, but in the long
run, open standards usually win.

I would bet on a company like WordPress or perhaps Tumblr to come out with a
simple tool that makes publishing profiles and updates easy, and that is
designed with social search in mind. Maybe this will be an open-source tool,
maybe it will be a commercial service supported by monthly fees or
advertising. My guess is that many companies will get into this category,
and that ‹ just as there is diversity among blogging and personal publishing
tools ‹ there will not be one clear winner. Blog authoring and hosting
companies are logical entrants, as they already do the majority of what¹s
needed for an open social network.

Search will be an important component of this, and I would expect that
Google and other search vendors will play a dominant role here. There should
also be opportunities for companies that specialize in people and social
search. They¹ll make money, as they already do, by mixing targeted ads with
their social search tools.

The good news for users is that this will be an open market, an ecosystem,
with no lock in. Users will be able to choose among many profile and update
publishing tools. They¹ll also be able to use whatever search tool they
prefer. Most importantly, users (a.k.a. publishers) will own their data, and
will be able to control how it is presented to the outside world.

The bad news for social networking companies is that this is not a
winner-takes-all market, with winner-takes-all valuations. Blog authoring
tools are a good comparison. This is certainly not a bad business to be in,
but it is not a get-rich-quick business, either. The barriers to entry will
also disappear as the network effect of having a large user community
becomes irrelevant when every participant is equally searchable via multiple
services. I also think that the general paranoia about big companies using
personal data inappropriately will be an incentive for people to switch to
other tools that provide more control over the use and presentation of their
data.

If I had to pick a category to start a company in, I¹d pick authoring tools.
There¹s real long-term value there, as people tend to pick a publishing tool
and stick with it ‹ and they¹ll more for higher-end tools. If I were
Facebook, I¹d be thinking about how to participate in this trend ‹ in other
words, deal with change before it deals with you.