Ning… really worth that much?

With all of the funding talk of Ning in the blogosphere and FastCompany, I thought that they would be a good topic for this week’s blog post.

I don’t know if it’s just me, but from my brief use of the Ning site… I’m not finding their platform too compelling.

Maybe I’m spoiled by Facebook… or trained is a better word… I can’t help but look for features on Ning that I’m used to on Facebook. Or maybe it’s the style/functionality of Facebook that I’m looking for. I get this odd feeling that Ning is simply aiming for quantity over quality. It’s true that the site was established as a platform for people to create their own social networking site. Although it might be unfair to compare Ning with a SNS like Facebook feature-wise, they are competing time-wise with users already invested in other SNSs.

Ning provides the social networking tools that are used on popular SNSs. Features like, Videos, Photos, Blogs, Groups, Events, Forums, An Activity Section (a News Feed ala Facebook), and Member List. Sure you’ve got all of the ingredients to make a Social Networking Site work… but I haven’t found an individual SNS compelling enough for me to join on Ning.

So that’s what worries me most about Ning. Let’s start out with the look, or the lack of consistency in Ning’s look. Everything from the banner on the top of a Ning SNS, the color scheme, the layout/order of all the modules (Video, Photo etc…) is different (this is both good and bad). There are some more well done than others, but it really just boils down to a bunch of content on one page, which is overwhelming to me and I’m assuming many other users. The one consistent feature, is the navigation bar on the top of the SNS starting with Community, My Page and so on. So there is a freedom to create a specific look for your SNS, but that freedom allows for sloppy, over saturated home/community pages for a SNS created on Ning. I’d prefer the initial page on a Ning SNS to be clean, less cluttered, easy to navigate, and concise. When it’s easy to throw things together and call it a SNS, the end result may not be so compelling.

But I could just be taking the idea of Ning the wrong way… it sure is allowing for the long tail of SNSs. This is a good and a bad thing. Good because any interest, niche, hobby, etc… can be made into a SNS of sorts. Maybe not as in depth as Facebook or MySpace, but with all of the components that constitute a SNS will be present. I think a SNS needs to be compelling, and have quality content for users of its site that are passionate for the particular niche the Ning SNS is trying to fill. The sheer volume of different SNS variations on Ning are mind numbing, and will continue to grow. Whether or not the Ning approach proves effective will be something to watch for… but call me pessimistic when I say that it will be hard to convince users of larger SNS to find/create their niche on Ning and continue using it. There is something too generic/stale about Ning that I think will never go away… and that will keep each individual Ning SNS from getting a fully invested userbase. Oh… and I’m curious as to what Ning’s business model will be to monetize their create your own SNS platform, besides online advertising…

Hallelujah, granularity is here! (Facebook)

So if you’ve logged onto Facebook this morning, you’d find out that Facebook has changed their Privacy controls quite a bit by adding more granularity. Here is what they posted at the top of my News Feed,

We’ve added more privacy options.

Now you can use friend lists to control exactly who can see what. We’ve also added the option to share information with “Friends of Friends”. For more details, check out the Privacy page.

So what does this mean? Let me take a look at all of the different areas we can now tweak, adjusting the visibility of a Facebook user’s account.

• Profile
  • Before, we were limited to creating only one list of people called the “Limited Profile” where users could select portions of their profile to be shown, and the rest hidden to select Friends. In the previous system, it was an all in, the limited profile view, or a complete block of a user. This was limited because most users in the real world have multiple subsets of friends, that could be categorized under “Work/Professional”, “School”, “Family”, and more. These different subsets would only be allowed certain bits of information, such as pictures/videos, what you were doing exactly, or even who your other friends are. Now a user’s profile can be tailored exactly to how they specify them to be. For example, you may not want your professional friends to see any videos or pictures of you so you can create a “friend list” for them, and add that list to a limited group who cannot access those areas of your profile. This is powerful because it enables the Facebook user to more clearly define the offline groups in their Facebook network.
  • On the opposite end of the spectrum, it looks like Facebook has also allowed users to open up their profile more if they choose to do so. They have added a new grouping of access called “Friends of Friends”. This can be enabled for the different areas of the profile to make it easier for second degree friends to access certain bits of your profile, such as your contact info and basic information. This is good for those who have a small Facebook network of people and are willing to give more information out to more friends of friends that will help make more connections possible.

All in all, this is what I have been waiting for. I haven’t found any real faults with the addition of more advanced, granular customizations to the Privacy area of my own Facebook account. I believe it can only improve the usability of Facebook. In my first module paper, which I have attached here Facebook’s Pattern for Privacy Concern, it looks as if Facebook has answered my plea. Thanks Mark and Company!