Google: Facebook is pissing off users

In an interview with the Business Insider, Bradley Horowitz has critiqued Facebook by stating that Facebook is “pissing off users.”

Bradley says in the interview that he believes that Facebook is the “social network of the past” and believes the large number of advertisements is destroying the user experience of the world's largest social network. Horowitz went on to use an analogy of two people chatting, while a sandwich salesman tries to sell them a sandwich, he said:

I'm trying to communicate in that space of social connection.

It doesn't matter if I 'like' the sandwich, it doesn't matter if it's personalized with my favorite mustard; that is the wrong time to try and dangle it in front of me. There is a time and place for sandwiches. It's called lunch at a restaurant.

After hinting that Facebook is just a sandwich that no one wants anymore, he added that Facebook's strategy of implementing advertisements into people's Facebook feeds is “pissing off users and frustrating brands."

Horowitz insists that Google is doing a better job by using its recommendations for products and services on Google+ more subtly, rather than completely in front of users.

We agree and feel it's a much better approach to subtly place ads on a social network rather than spam ads in front of people's user space when reading a social feed, because it can make a social network unappealing, cheap and tacky. That being said; are people actually using Google+ because of its laid back approach when it comes to advertising? Probably not. Google reckons 100 million people are using the network a month, but whether they're using to make the recommendation scheme work is beyond us.

Facebook may be a sandwich that nobody wants anymore but if food is placed in front of you, wouldn't you just eat it anyway?

Source: Business Insider | Image via Brain23
 

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

VLC launches Kickstarter campaign for Windows 8 app

Next Story

Microsoft: Surface Pro pricing to start at $899

66 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

facebook doesn't really **** me off, but I'm getting a little annoyed at all the duplicate profiles around lately, as well as the seemingly large lack of policing of images. I've started to see more and more porn images on peoples timelines or profile photos, as well as fake accounts, or girls with images of known actresses or models. facebook REALLY needs to start policing their accounts better or I'm gonna start to get ****ed.

The ads don't bother me as much as the random requests for Facebook games. I refuse to add a game app to my profile and it angers me whenever I get spammed with invites for [insert random Facebook game]. I have so many of them on my blocked apps list. Fortunately, that list hasn't grown in months.

i agree Facebook it getting lot of people mad like my self im using Google+ is better and more easy to work with family and friend!!!

I completely agree with the Google exec - the ads, especially the ones dumped in the news feed on mobile (app or web), **** me off a lot. There are often more ads then actual status updates from friends. I stopped using Facebook for quite a few months but because everyone else uses the bloody thing, I was missing out on a lot of stuff - mainly event invites. No one sends out actual invites to events any more, not even a text message. The sooner I can ditch Facebook the better.

I'm not big in to Facebook and although I have Google+ but haven't used it. Social networking sites or applications are only as good as it's user base to each of us, as in our friends. Whether or not one is better than the other, basically you have to use what your friends are on or it's useless to you.
I've used many many communication type sites and applications in almost 20 years, and even back that far there's been some that blow anything away that's around now, but if you're friends drift off to something else, you gotta follow or not keep in touch with them anymore.

LOL, a few months ago, I wasn't even aware FB HAD ads....until I worked on a friends computer who didn't have adblock, and I saw all the ads on FB.

people seem to forget that MySpace had millions of users too. They tried to monopolize and failed. The big question, is FB up to the challenge or will they misstep. Google+ exists in the event they do fail

the420kid said,
people seem to forget that MySpace had millions of users too. They tried to monopolize and failed. The big question, is FB up to the challenge or will they misstep. Google+ exists in the event they do fail

Myspace had a very small amount of users, compared to Facebook's 1 billion (that's right--Facebook doesn't just have millions of users now; it hit 1 billion in October/the end of September)

Calum said,

Myspace had a very small amount of users, compared to Facebook's 1 billion (that's right--Facebook doesn't just have millions of users now; it hit 1 billion in October/the end of September)

Sure thay have a billion or so users but the point is still pretty valid. If they don't take notes from what MySpace did and don't listen to the feedback from their core users then they risk going down the same road. Look at how many dead (or barely there) services or buried along that road. MySpace is just one!

Richeemxx said,

Sure thay have a billion or so users but the point is still pretty valid. If they don't take notes from what MySpace did and don't listen to the feedback from their core users then they risk going down the same road. Look at how many dead (or barely there) services or buried along that road. MySpace is just one!


I do agree, but my point was just that it would take more for Facebook to fail in the same way Myspace did that it took for Myspace to fail, due to how many more active users Facebook has

Jason Stillion said,
Google+ w/ Real name requirement to post review on Google play is ticking me off.

Exactly. Has anyone else being harrassed by Google with begging for phone number message before loging into GMail? "Just give us mooooar personal info, because such a scary and terrible thing like forgetting password may happen."

Why do adverts in the feed **** people off? Facebook have to make money somehow, and adverts integrated into my News Feed, in the same style as other posts, are much, much better (to me) than ugly, big, flashy banner ads.

I just treat them the same as any other post I'm not interested in: I merely ignore them and look at the next story in my feed. They annoy me in absolutely no way.

Calum said,
Why do adverts in the feed **** people off? Facebook have to make money somehow, and adverts integrated into my News Feed, in the same style as other posts, are much, much better (to me) than ugly, big, flashy banner ads.

I just treat them the same as any other post I'm not interested in: I merely ignore them and look at the next story in my feed. They annoy me in absolutely no way.

this has been beat to death.. Most people don't wanna see the crap and wouldn't click on anything to by stuff either. And it stretches every where with ad's all the way to TV and promo's on a dvd when you buy / rent etc
I know i've never clicked a link on a site in my life once. So why do i want them in face ?
ANd no i don;t consider my self affected by media advertising no matter how much people wanna argue with me on that.. for one thing i only watch recorded TV with the commercials cut out and i watch movies with the trailers ripped out and the only content i am ever exposed to is content i go out of my way to seek out by doing my own active research (which is what a commercial or banner ad is suppose to replace ?)

we'll go round and round with this for ages.. and never get anywhere.
it might have something to do with who pockets revenue from ad's lol
i remember setting up banners etc on some sites like a decade ago,
i was trying to make money and if people wanted to stop that i don't blame them
why would i sit here and make stupid little excuses for that ?
If your gonna be a sleazy douche and spam people that be up front about it
and don't pretend your doing good for the community lol

and people who LIKE that crap are sicko's and can have all my viagra spam emails
Leave your email address here and i'll forward them too you.
Just joking ofcourse because i don;t ever get any and i never have..
I don't sign up for dumb crap with my email address = i get zero spam!
[ontopic] because spam emails is no different than banner ad's or tampon commercials etc..

I am Not PCyr said,

this has been beat to death.. Most people don't wanna see the crap and wouldn't click on anything to by stuff either. And it stretches every where with ad's all the way to TV and promo's on a dvd when you buy / rent etc
I know i've never clicked a link on a site in my life once. So why do i want them in face ?
ANd no i don;t consider my self affected by media advertising no matter how much people wanna argue with me on that.. for one thing i only watch recorded TV with the commercials cut out and i watch movies with the trailers ripped out and the only content i am ever exposed to is content i go out of my way to seek out by doing my own active research (which is what a commercial or banner ad is suppose to replace ?)

we'll go round and round with this for ages.. and never get anywhere.
it might have something to do with who pockets revenue from ad's lol
i remember setting up banners etc on some sites like a decade ago,
i was trying to make money and if people wanted to stop that i don't blame them
why would i sit here and make stupid little excuses for that ?
If your gonna be a sleazy douche and spam people that be up front about it
and don't pretend your doing good for the community lol

and people who LIKE that crap are sicko's and can have all my viagra spam emails
Leave your email address here and i'll forward them too you.
Just joking ofcourse because i don;t ever get any and i never have..
I don't sign up for dumb crap with my email address = i get zero spam!
[ontopic] because spam emails is no different than banner ad's or tampon commercials etc..


I completely agree with your view on ads. I very much dislike ads, I haven't ever clicked on an ad on any website, and of course I'd rather not see any ads on Facebook, just like I'd rather not see ads on TV or elsewhere. But none of your comment seems to answer my question, as I backed up my question with important points: Why do people allow it to bother them that much that they dislike Facebook for it, when they like Facebook as a product? I ask this question because we all know that Facebook have to make money in order to continue providing the services and products they provide us with. Aren't Facebook going about this the right way? They have to make money, so they've chosen a format of advert that doesn't stand out and doesn't ruin the site design. The ads in the News Feed blend in well with the other stories and are integrated, which means it's very easy for us to move past them and look at the next post in our feed that interests us. You surely can't tell me that you find every single post and status update in your News Feed interesting, can you? Surely some of your friends will sometimes post a status update that doesn't interest you? Does that annoy you as much as these adverts? When I see a post or status update that doesn't interest me, I just look to the next post in the feed and that's usually one I find interesting. I don't let that post that doesn't interest me bother me. The exact same is the case with adverts or sponsored posts in the feed.

Do you see what I'm saying?

I'm not trying to say anyone's wrong; I'm just trying to understand the disdain for Facebook, considering all of what I mentioned in my first paragraph: They have to make money and they appear, to me, to be doing so in the most feasible and least intrusive way possible, to provide the best experience to the user.

Calum said,

I completely agree with your view on ads. I very much dislike ads, I haven't ever clicked on an ad on any website, and of course I'd rather not see any ads on Facebook, just like I'd rather not see ads on TV or elsewhere. But none of your comment seems to answer my question, as I backed up my question with important points: Why do people allow it to bother them that much that they dislike Facebook for it, when they like Facebook as a product? I ask this question because we all know that Facebook have to make money in order to continue providing the services and products they provide us with. Aren't Facebook going about this the right way? They have to make money, so they've chosen a format of advert that doesn't stand out and doesn't ruin the site design. The ads in the News Feed blend in well with the other stories and are integrated, which means it's very easy for us to move past them and look at the next post in our feed that interests us. You surely can't tell me that you find every single post and status update in your News Feed interesting, can you? Surely some of your friends will sometimes post a status update that doesn't interest you? Does that annoy you as much as these adverts? When I see a post or status update that doesn't interest me, I just look to the next post in the feed and that's usually one I find interesting. I don't let that post that doesn't interest me bother me. The exact same is the case with adverts or sponsored posts in the feed.

Do you see what I'm saying?

I'm not trying to say anyone's wrong; I'm just trying to understand the disdain for Facebook, considering all of what I mentioned in my first paragraph: They have to make money and they appear, to me, to be doing so in the most feasible and least intrusive way possible, to provide the best experience to the user.

It just takes away from the experience. I don't want to feel like I'm shopping or on a dating site when I'm on Facebook. I use AdBlock because of this very problem.

If they need money that bad, I'd be glad to pay a fee to have an ad-free version of the site.

MidTxWRX said,

It just takes away from the experience. I don't want to feel like I'm shopping or on a dating site when I'm on Facebook. I use AdBlock because of this very problem.

If they need money that bad, I'd be glad to pay a fee to have an ad-free version of the site.


I agree that they should offer an ad-free version of the site, for those who are willing to pay it I'm not sure why they don't.

Is the FB generation that p......g me off. But I don´t have that problem, I don´t use FB anymore from a long time. I have the same friends as ever and I´m happier than ever.

if "all" you really knew what people want, you wouldn't be here on a forum whining about it, you would be on a tropical island retired from the billions you made from doing it right.

rippleman said,
if "all" you really knew what people want, you wouldn't be here on a forum whining about it, you would be on a tropical island retired from the billions you made from doing it right.

one problem..
you can't please everyone though.

nice comment but not practical ..or even based in reality lol

they didnt **** me off, i just have no use for it anymore. At least to visit the site. I still keep the account because of the IM/message integration with WP.

It's not ****ing me off because of that. The only things that are ****ing me off is the lack of two features I deem important that I'd like and the problems with Places Pages for cities, towns, suburbs, villages etc. in the UK (e.g. The names of my previous locations, in my About view, are inconsistent--some end in "[City], United Kingdom," whereas others are just the name of the village or suburb).

100% Agree with him. The only reason I am not shutting my facebook down is because of my friends. Google plus is an OK alternative but google made some bad reputation for privacy intrusion which I personally think that's not true entirely. facebook time is over. facebook has just became a monster with a very ugly UI (Timeline) which in my opinion make no sense at all.

S3P€hR said,
100% Agree with him. The only reason I am not shutting my facebook down is because of my friends. Google plus is an OK alternative but google made some bad reputation for privacy intrusion which I personally think that's not true entirely. facebook time is over. facebook has just became a monster with a very ugly UI (Timeline) which in my opinion make no sense at all.

Why doesn't Timeline make sense to you? It makes brilliant sense to me that the Facebook profile should be a way to easily view whatever we've shared on it.

Calum said,

Why doesn't Timeline make sense to you? It makes brilliant sense to me that the Facebook profile should be a way to easily view whatever we've shared on it.

Lets start from the bottom: first of all, born event. what do you suppose to share when you were born? probably a picture of the way you came out to life? that would be a horrible picture. I bet nobody wants to know about it. That is just a bad idea. perhaps date of birth in an old fashioned way was better. Grouping by year is good but having those dots are just annoying. one left and one right. is just not necessary. the old way of looking was just fine pehaps with date label getting bolder. Look I am web developer. I have seen many sites I Know what is Good UI and What is bad one and facebook Timeline is BAD. trust me.

S3P€hR said,

Lets start from the bottom: first of all, born event. what do you suppose to share when you were born? probably a picture of the way you came out to life? that would be a horrible picture. I bet nobody wants to know about it. That is just a bad idea.
[. . .]

I like that Life Event. I've attached a baby photo of myself to that Life Event from a few days after I was born, and I've had good feedback from friends and acquaintances about it. I think being able to see the entire life and development of a friend, acquaintance, subscriber, or public figure is a cool idea, just like I think it's interesting to see the same about a brand or company.

In my opinion, Timeline is how social networking should be: A social networking profile should reflect one's entire life, past and present, in my opinion. That's one reason I'm not a fan of Google+ yet, even though I believe its current design is better than Facebook's.

S3P€hR said,

[. . .]
perhaps date of birth in an old fashioned way was better. Grouping by year is good but having those dots are just annoying. one left and one right. is just not necessary. the old way of looking was just fine pehaps with date label getting bolder. Look I am web developer. I have seen many sites I Know what is Good UI and What is bad one and facebook Timeline is BAD. trust me.

I'm a web developer and designer, as well as a software developer and designer. Just like to the many skilled designers and developers at Facebook and some other companies, the design of Timeline makes sense to us. Whether it's a good design or not is subjective, not objective, as is evidenced by the fact that some of us web designers feel it's a great design/layout.

Even though Facebook are now testing a version of Timeline that just has one column, I like the two-column layout, and they're probably only thinking of changing it back to one column because of how many users complained. Some average computer users just can't understand or handle the two-column layout very well. That doesn't mean it's a bad design; sometimes, us designers have to alter our great designs because too many computer users lack the understanding skills we have.

I see no problem with the dots. The dots are there to inform you that you will see more posts if you click on them. Of course, Timeline cannot show all posts and content as you scroll down because it wouldn't be able to load it all like that, fast and efficiently (Facebook said that they had to completely reengineer and change the architecture of some of the backend in order to make Timeline as efficient and fast as possible). Plus, it would be harder to view and manage, if it didn't just show "highlights" (the most popular posts or ones deemed important), allowing you to drill down into the month or year at any point.

Calum said,

I like that Life Event. I've attached a baby photo of myself to that Life Event from a few days after I was born, and I've had good feedback from friends and acquaintances about it. I think being able to see the entire life and development of a friend, acquaintance, subscriber, or public figure is a cool idea, just like I think it's interesting to see the same about a brand or company.

In my opinion, Timeline is how social networking should be: A social networking profile should reflect one's entire life, past and present, in my opinion. That's one reason I'm not a fan of Google+ yet, even though I believe its current design is better than Facebook's.


I'm a web developer and designer, as well as a software developer and designer. Just like to the many skilled designers and developers at Facebook and some other companies, the design of Timeline makes sense to us. Whether it's a good design or not is subjective, not objective, as is evidenced by the fact that some of us web designers feel it's a great design/layout.

Even though Facebook are now testing a version of Timeline that just has one column, I like the two-column layout, and they're probably only thinking of changing it back to one column because of how many users complained. Some average computer users just can't understand or handle the two-column layout very well. That doesn't mean it's a bad design; sometimes, us designers have to alter our great designs because too many computer users lack the understanding skills we have.

I see no problem with the dots. The dots are there to inform you that you will see more posts if you click on them. Of course, Timeline cannot show all posts and content as you scroll down because it wouldn't be able to load it all like that, fast and efficiently (Facebook said that they had to completely reengineer and change the architecture of some of the backend in order to make Timeline as efficient and fast as possible). Plus, it would be harder to view and manage, if it didn't just show "highlights" (the most popular posts or ones deemed important), allowing you to drill down into the month or year at any point.

I also love Timeline... and when I run into people and ask them why they seem to hate it they can't give me an answer. They just "hate" it.

so 'the' advertising and data mining corp. says one website ****es off users? bitch please...
meanwhile in the real world google does literally everything to get users to sign up for g+, but hey, why beat a dead horse...

It will only keep getting worse now that they're publicly traded. It's now all about money and profits rather than what the user wants.

I block the ads on the proper Facebook site, however its the adverts in the mobile app for "pages" that annoy me. I keep seeing the same ones over and over again because a certain friend has liked a certain page. Doesn't mean i have any interest in Paddy Power for example: http://i46.tinypic.com/2nsapvr.png

InsaneNutter said,
I block the ads on the proper Facebook site, however its the adverts in the mobile app for "pages" that annoy me. I keep seeing the same ones over and over again because a certain friend has liked a certain page. Doesn't mean i have any interest in Paddy Power for example: http://i46.tinypic.com/2nsapvr.png

Why do you allow them to annoy you? Why don't you just ignore them and look to the next feed item, like you would if you saw a status update you weren't interested in?

I don't know... I never see any ads when I use FB.

Love you Firefox+Adblock.


Although... When I use it on my Windows Phone... BLECHHH!!!! So many ads.

Nimdock said,
Although... When I use it on my Windows Phone... BLECHHH!!!! So many ads.

I know what you mean! Thankfully, the WP Facebook app has zero ads... on WP7 it runs like a turtle... but on WP8 the app runs like a dream! It just needs more features, which still make me use the site

mikesingh said,
Google needs to stop pretending they can do everything. Google+ is a waste of time.

I think Google+ has better UI. Facebook (the old UI) was very nice, but nowadays it just became redundant and crappy looking.

S3P€hR said,
I think Google+ has better UI. Facebook (the old UI) was very nice, but nowadays it just became redundant and crappy looking.

The UI has definitely gotten tired over the past few iterations. I also think the site itself has become slow to use and things tend to just not work at times. If the site reverted to a lighter, cleaner version akin to its older self... I'd have no qualms.

mikesingh said,

The UI has definitely gotten tired over the past few iterations. I also think the site itself has become slow to use and things tend to just not work at times. If the site reverted to a lighter, cleaner version akin to its older self... I'd have no qualms.


Yep, as I said in my opinion the only strength facebook has is its number of users. that's all. Is like when you want to see your friend you will go see them nomatter in a nice restaurant or at the ghetto. facebook is now becoming like the ghetto but with all your friends waiting there.

S3P€hR said,

I think Google+ has better UI. Facebook (the old UI) was very nice, but nowadays it just became redundant and crappy looking.

I disagree. I can't even stand to look at the Google+ layout. Feels cramped.

Facebook's layout I think hit the sweet spot prior to the change to the new messages UI. Can't search through conversations anymore for some stupid reason, the text is all bloated between the font and spacing... Not sure who was responsible for the change at Facebook, but it's awful.

S3P€hR said,

I think Google+ has better UI. Facebook (the old UI) was very nice, but nowadays it just became redundant and crappy looking.

Also, their FB App constantly borks when new updates are available. Sad how more people would rather use their messenger app and currently out ranks the prior. Imo FB has just lost it's edge when the Myspace fad died off! Lets see...

Myspace=dead and only used by a certain amount of people anymore.
Twitter: Is pretty much over run by celebrities
Facebook: Great place for starting dumb **** and spam people with game requests etc
G+: Will replace "Facebook" sooner or later.

TCA said,

Also, their FB App constantly borks when new updates are available. Sad how more people would rather use their messenger app and currently out ranks the prior. Imo FB has just lost it's edge when the Myspace fad died off! Lets see...

Myspace=dead and only used by a certain amount of people anymore.
Twitter: Is pretty much over run by celebrities
Facebook: Great place for starting dumb **** and spam people with game requests etc
G+: Will replace "Facebook" sooner or later.

Dumb. Facebook only sucks ass if your friends suck ass, and there are many ways to control who can send you what.

WAR-DOG said,
Why? AdBlock works just fine on facebook.

ya but that isn't ethical anymore. Saying that almost anywhere is likely to get the same snotty attitude as saying your pirate stuff..
and becareful talking about that.. i got warnings from neowin FAST on a similar topic
wher OTHER people brought up the Adblock plugins and i joined in and said basically,
LOL i didn't know neowin HAD ad's because i too have adblock !
shortly i after i was reprimanded for my bad behaviour lol
How am i bad guy for not knowing a site has ad's ?

WAR-DOG said,
Why? AdBlock works just fine on facebook.

With the exception that they are now adding more 'sponsored' posts into your newsfeed. AFAIK since they look and act like any other FB post you can't use adblock to remove them.

Richeemxx said,

With the exception that they are now adding more 'sponsored' posts into your newsfeed. AFAIK since they look and act like any other FB post you can't use adblock to remove them.

Try FBPurity http://www.fbpurity.com/
Works on Firefox, Google Chrome, Safari and Opera
Been using it to remove the crap in Facebook

kurusawa said,

Try FBPurity http://www.fbpurity.com/
Works on Firefox, Google Chrome, Safari and Opera
Been using it to remove the crap in Facebook

User content seems to be my biggest annoyance with Facebook. Someone this morning was posting "Notes to self" on there. If its a note to self, why the **** are you posting it on Facebook?

Richeemxx said,

With the exception that they are now adding more 'sponsored' posts into your newsfeed. AFAIK since they look and act like any other FB post you can't use adblock to remove them.

oops wrong comment to reply to

I am Not PCyr said,

ya but that isn't ethical anymore. Saying that almost anywhere is likely to get the same snotty attitude as saying your pirate stuff..
and becareful talking about that.. i got warnings from neowin FAST on a similar topic
wher OTHER people brought up the Adblock plugins and i joined in and said basically,
LOL i didn't know neowin HAD ad's because i too have adblock !
shortly i after i was reprimanded for my bad behaviour lol
How am i bad guy for not knowing a site has ad's ?

how is blocking ads equivalent to pirating? So you're saying that when a commercial comes on tv, and i flip to another channel, I'm pirating cable?

Getting so annoyed with Facebook recently, if it wasn't the only way for me to keep in contact with some of my friends and family, I would have got rid ages ago.

matt4444 said,
Getting so annoyed with Facebook recently, if it wasn't the only way for me to keep in contact with some of my friends and family, I would have got rid ages ago.

And it's still great to stalk hot girls

matt4444 said,
Getting so annoyed with Facebook recently, if it wasn't the only way for me to keep in contact with some of my friends and family, I would have got rid ages ago.

Oh and landlines, Skype, messaging and e-mail are all pretty much non-usable these days, huh?

/s

Luis Mazza said,

Oh and landlines, Skype, messaging and e-mail are all pretty much non-usable these days, huh?

/s

yes they are if the people you WANT to talk to don't use them..

his point is spot on.

I am Not PCyr said,

yes they are if the people you WANT to talk to don't use them..

his point is spot on.

Yeah, the kind of people you're referring to must be really a bunch of ogres or facebook zombies.
I hope I never get to meet anyone like this.

Luis Mazza said,

Oh and landlines, Skype, messaging and e-mail are all pretty much non-usable these days, huh?

/s

One family member is my Grandma, she lives up north, has a basic pc. She goes a few times a month to see what the family is up to, she especially likes seeing photos and it is the easiest way for her to view them. We speak to her on the phone, but we can't share albums of pictures over the phone. Skype won't even run on her PC and she doesn't even have a webcam.

Anyway, I just said my view about Facebook, no need to criticize.

Luis Mazza said,

Yeah, the kind of people you're referring to must be really a bunch of ogres or facebook zombies.
I hope I never get to meet anyone like this.

Hope I never meet anyone like you.