America's Teens Are Choosing YouTube Over Facebook (bloomberg.com) 78
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Three years ago, Facebook was the dominant social media site among U.S. teens, visited by 71 percent of people in that magic, trendsetting demographic. Not anymore. Now only 51 percent of kids ages 13-17 use Facebook, according to Pew Research Center. The world's largest social network has finally been eclipsed in popularity by YouTube, Snapchat and Facebook Inc.-owned Instagram. Alphabet Inc.'s YouTube is the most popular, used by 85 percent of teens, according to Pew.
Instagram is slightly more popular than Snapchat overall, Pew said, with 72 percent of respondents saying they use the photo-sharing app, compared with Snapchat's 69 percent. But Snap Inc. is holding its own, despite Instagram's frequent parroting of its features. About one-third of the survey's respondents said they visit Snapchat and YouTube most often, while 15 percent said Instagram is their most frequent destination. Meanwhile, only 10 percent of teens said Facebook is their most-used online platform. The Pew analysis was based on a survey of 1,058 parents who have a teenager from 13 to 17, as well as interviews with 743 teens themselves. The survey also found that 99% of teens own a smartphone or have access to one, and 45% said they're online "on a near-constant basis."
Instagram is slightly more popular than Snapchat overall, Pew said, with 72 percent of respondents saying they use the photo-sharing app, compared with Snapchat's 69 percent. But Snap Inc. is holding its own, despite Instagram's frequent parroting of its features. About one-third of the survey's respondents said they visit Snapchat and YouTube most often, while 15 percent said Instagram is their most frequent destination. Meanwhile, only 10 percent of teens said Facebook is their most-used online platform. The Pew analysis was based on a survey of 1,058 parents who have a teenager from 13 to 17, as well as interviews with 743 teens themselves. The survey also found that 99% of teens own a smartphone or have access to one, and 45% said they're online "on a near-constant basis."
Social media (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Search for something on Twitter. 99% of it is marketing crap - filled with a dozen hashtags, and probably auto-generated. Real posts by real people are rare - and they're the only ones worth engaging with. Pity there's no way I can filter my stream/results to only get such tweets :(
So, we've created a monster (Score:5, Insightful)
Back when we were looking fondly toward the future where normal people would be on the Internet, we didn't really think of participants so tremendous that more than a 10th of traffic might go their way. Just as there wasn't only one telephone number that everyone called. But that's what we got. We thought the internet would be a tool for democracy. We we ever f**king wrong.
Over time, it might turn out that the market flattens out or that distributed social networking really does catch on. I hope. Just reading about the internet as the fiefdom of a dozen companies makes me ill.
Re: So, we've created a monster (Score:1)
Almost 25 years since Eternal September. Hard to believe it.
Re: (Score:2)
salfter@ultravps ~ $ ./september.pl
Thu Sep 9039 22:46:09 PDT 1993
salfter@ultravps ~ $
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because everyone was supposed to host their own websites. ISPs shut that down quickly, it can be extremely difficult or near impossible to get ports unblocked so you can host your own services. Every consumer-level internet service agreement I've read says no servers allowed. Distributed services won't catch on until that goes away. And managing your personal website is still too complex. In fact, it was easier in web 1.0 days when you used FrontPage or another WYSIWYS document editor to create pages.
Re: (Score:3)
> it can be extremely difficult or near impossible to get ports unblocked so you can host your own services.
Not anymore, really. ISPs don't give a flying flock of sparrows if you run a web server on your connection. All the big ISPs don't block port 80 or 443.
The bigger problem these days is dealing with changing IP addresses, and the fact that a single web server running on a home connection can't scale up if something on it becomes even slightly popular.
Re:So, we've created a monster (Score:4, Insightful)
Plus the question of whether you really want to open a port on your firewall to run your website which you will inevitably want to use any of a number of software packages of very dubious quality, but high user friendliness, and thus expose your entire home network, dick pics, toaster, bank records etc. to some rando hacker on the interwebs? Do you want to pay all that extra money for an SSL cert from someone? Couple that with highly asymmetric bandwidth, and the answer becomes no.
Your website you pay for someone to host, if it gets hacked and it was important, hopefully you have backups. If it wasn't important, well it's probably gone forever.
Still, I don't think I'd go back to 1991, AOL and dial-up. The internet changed the world, we just can't have the nice things we thought we could have had.
Re:So, we've created a monster (Score:4, Insightful)
SSL certs protect your visitors, not you. And you can get free SSL certs from Let's Encrypt that are trusted by every major browser.
Re: (Score:2)
I am aware of that about SSL, but if you are going to offer any sort of interaction with the user that requires a sign in, I feel you are obligated to use SSL, even if you're not holding sensitive information. People continue to use the same damn credentials everywhere, expect security and get really upset if their bad habits lead to unfortunate results.
I did not know about Let's Encrypt, the last time I pursued this they did not exist.
Still, for most people, even technically savvy people, I would advocate
Re: So, we've created a monster (Score:1)
Let's Encrypt certs expire fairly quickly. 90 days last time I checked.
Re: (Score:2)
And that's a good thing from a security standpoint. Renewals can be fully automated too.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, it's a bad thing from a security standpoint, IMO. Among other things:
Re: (Score:2)
significantly increases the MITM risk by making it possible for third parties who manage to get write access to your web tree to generate certs that are indistinguishable from real ones
No time to go point by point, but this one is just silly. If someone gains write access to your server, MITM is not even relevant anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
Not true. There are lots of potential misconfigurations that could allow you to add a file where none exists, or make a request for a specific URL provide contents without actually having a file there, but that would not allow overwriting existing files because of permissions, e.g. by overriding some error handler.
Also, if someone gains temporary write access through a known security hole that you later fix (e.g. by upgrading some large, monolithic app like WordPress or VBulletin), the attacker gains the
Re: (Score:2)
Web hosting is so cheap now, and Cloudflare offers free caching services that will prevent you getting Slashdotted or DDOSed.
Turns out web hosting is too hard for most people though, they prefer stuff like Wordpress and Instagram that makes it easy to just post stuff. It's the age old trade off of autonomy and freedom vs. convenience and getting the bar low enough for people to participate.
Re: (Score:1)
The bigger problem these days is dealing with changing IP addresses, and the fact that a single web server running on a home connection can't scale up if something on it becomes even slightly popular.
There are dynamic DNS services, home routers even have a specific option for that to automatically register changing IPs (at least it was so last time I checked).
Re: (Score:3)
Then just get a business ISP account.
They really aren't more expensive than a consumer one that I've found.
Granted,mine is grandfathered in, but with Cox cable....about $70/mo...I get a decent level SLA (they do act quick too), and no ports blocked at all, and static IP address.
The up/down speeds are just fine fo
Re: (Score:2)
Consolidation of a lucrative emerging market is the way it's done, with internet companies being no exception, and the big fish generally eat the smaller fish... IBM letting go of intellectual property to Microsoft, Blockbuster not purchasing Netflix, etc., the exceptions rather than the rule.
The top companies in the world are internet-based, and they are all great gobblers of even borderline promising companies.
Re: (Score:2)
People invariably believe what they want to believe and they will believe all kinds of shit well beyond the propaganda they are served. Propaganda only works in a vacuum, they need to silence all voices except the handful they approve and that is impossible on the internet.
If you were looking for an intelligent response and blossoming of awareness, perhaps you need to sit back and accept the reality that an IQ of 100 is the average so half the people are dumber than that and 100 ain't all that bright, 110
Re: (Score:2)
I saw it coming, Bruce. It didn't help me do anything about it, but I saw this coming. And even as I railed against colleagues, peers, and family who all got their hands dirty participating in it one way or another, everyone called me paranoid and crazy. But if I had the pulpit that you do, maybe I could have at least saved a few of them.
Instead, the result is they just trust me even less because they can't fathom how I could have known.
Re: (Score:3)
Instead, the result is they just trust me even less because they can't fathom how I could have known.
Ah, the fate of the Cassandra. I too know that. You just have to sit back, smile, and eat the popcorn while they self destruct.
My learning moment was during the days of subprime loans, when real estate's value extended to infinity, and no loan was too sketchy. An 80 year old with a 50 year mortgage was fine business. While it was simple math, and I knew the end result the first time I saw the ads on Yahoo for people buying. million dollar houses with ridiculous low payments. I saw friends selling their
Re: So, we've created a monster (Score:3)
"We thought the internet would be a tool for democracy. We we ever f**king wrong."
It is a tool for democracy. People voted. You just happen to dislike the result.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Yesterday, I was randomly indulging in one of the things we did expect:
Rethinking Civilization — Crash Course World History 201 [youtube.com]
Quirky, not to everyone's taste (yay!), and damn interesting compared to the same 15 minutes invested in 99% of what my own childhood offered up.
This episode takes as its starting point a historical perspective from contrarian historian Willem van Schendel: that the mountain people weren't listless barbarians, but conscientious refugees of valley civilization (primarily organi
That age group shouldn't be using social media (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't let my kids use social media. They're not mature enough to understand what's too much sharing, privacy and the consequences of what you post being forever. It's one thing to watch videos on YouTube and another for revealing everything about themselves to the world to forever see.
Re:That age group shouldn't be using social media (Score:5, Interesting)
She seems to have trouble with the concept of "posting" vs "sending". She still assumes that if she sees something on Facebook from one of her friends they have "sent" it to her.
I am going to assume that this is not uncommon.
Re: (Score:2)
Hard to beat cat videos (Score:3)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hard to beat cat videos (Score:4, Interesting)
Ding ding ding ding! We have a winner!
YouTube is being used as a video diary. The fact that it does monetization is often the cherry on top. Facebook? They don't pay you jack squat But make a mindless YouTube video about crap and you can rake in real money.
Do it particularly well and you might not even need a job because YouTube can pay you better than any job you'd ever get.
Face it, teenage angst is one thing. Getting teenage angst to pay you some money? Well damn. And yes, YouTube is filled with tons of that dreck.
Youtub as a job (Score:3)
The fact that it does monetization is often the cherry on top. Facebook? They don't pay you jack squat But make a mindless YouTube video about crap and you can rake in real money.
Do it particularly well and you might not even need a job because YouTube can pay you better than any job you'd ever get
Until 1 year later (exactly when you've got credit to reimburse and need stable income) when Google decides to update the Youtube algorithm and suddenly you're not getting as many view / getting as much monetization.
(Those vloggers have vaguely heard once some weird saying about "eggs" and "baskets", but didn't really pay attention to what was meant).
Or some big drama controversy or whatever-gate emerges yet again, causing anything between advertiser pulling out, trolls trying to report videos just to demon
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I ran a BBS on a 300 baud modem!
A survey of parents? (Score:4, Informative)
Back before I became an engineer years ago, I used to read the engineering magazines annual salary surveys. It always looked awesome. Then I looked at who they surveyed- engineering managers, who had incentive to make it sound like engineering pay was much higher than it actually was.
Who in their right mind would survey parents about what their teen-age kids are doing?
If you're going to survey people about something, you have to survey the people you want to know about. Not their parents.
Duh!
Re: (Score:2)
So you're saying the tide pod challenge wasn't a pandemic?
Not surprising (Score:1)
What's not being said (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Youtube ISN'T just watchers. Parent's of kids everywhere are being told their kids want to stream on youtube. Most of them will never have more than a few viewers, it's the ones that get popular suddenly that make you nervous. If only youtube was just watchers, it wouldn't make me so nervous.
Mindless Chatter, Ja? (Score:5, Interesting)
At the risk of arousing any short-tempered teenager present at Slashdot into a brief, indignant rage followed by a momentary fit of existential angst followed by a sudden burst of inane remarks about the latest fusion garage band to explode onto YouTube this week, the youngsters have always wanted to natter and chatter about nothing that matters. I'll offer the pop-psychology explanation that taking and posting short videos to YouTube has become so quick and painless in an age of powerful cellphones with excellent video resolution that it beats struggling with the "felt" complexity of Facebook.
Mary sees a bee-YOO-tiful horsie galloping around a local farm pasture and snaps a quick video with lots of giggling and wavey "hi theres" to her besties. Off it goes to YouTube, and texts fly with the video URL. Why not?
Dan snaps a nice video of his totally rad dragster with selfie views of him grinning and punching out the "V" for victory sign from the driver's seat. Off it goes to YouTube, and texts fly with the video URL and "see-CRET" information about the next impromptu venue for screeching rubber and distant, wailing sirens. Why not?
It's rich media, and it's easy. Plus, YouTube is more happening than the Facebook with the disapproving grannies and the old farts who want to sell stuff. It's all in good fun! At least, I hope so. If it's an alien plot by the Betelgeusians to somehow subvert the next generation, then I'd prefer to be left alone with my little social illusions and my quaint notions about the general application of Ockham's Razor. And my vodka.
On the talking of bollocks. (Score:3)
At the risk of arousing any short-tempered teenager present at Slashdot into a brief, indignant rage followed by a momentary fit of existential angst followed by a sudden burst of inane remarks about the latest fusion garage band to explode onto YouTube this week, the youngsters have always wanted to natter and chatter about nothing that matters.
Yes, kids have always liked to talk bollocks... This isn't a revelation and it's not restricted to youngsters either, a bunch of 20 something blokes at the pub results in inane chatter (called "banter" in En_GB), middle aged mothers doing yoga is more about sharing celeb gossip than contortion, octogenarians sitting around talking about how much better it was back in their day and how kids have it so much better now, in fact, they have this conversation several times a day.
Talking bollocks is almost univ
Re: (Score:3)
Social Media (Score:4, Interesting)
I have diarrhea (Score:1)
So what? (Score:2)
My two toddlers also use Youtube more than Facebook.
People aren't "choosing" one of these over the other. Youtube isn't supplanting Facebook. The factors that make people choose which social network they use and which streaming video service they use are very different.
uhh.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Kids move from trendy to trendy (Score:1)
those tech savvy teens again! (Score:3)
Yep, those tech savvy teens are way smarter than us oldsters!
"Take that, you privacy-invading Facebook! We're going with Google!"
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but I can maintain membership on multiple sites. It's not really an either-or problem. I guess I'm on YouTube, Facebook, Reddit, Github, Slashdot, ...
Consumers (Score:1)
Uncensored (Score:2)
Because the chat area is uncensored. I was watching one of those live streaming train channels and happened to glance over at the chat stream. Holy cow! There is some of the most racist, vile people on there. I guess people love the thrill of relative anonymity and the fact that nobody is going to physically kick their ass.