Recently, several internet financial observers have attributed the emergence of the social network Ello as a response to Facebook’s strict username policies and ambiguous privacy rules.
A couple of weeks ago, I received an unusual friend request on Facebook from a 10 year old Nigerian boy. After I refused his request, I asked some friends if they had received similar requests, and they explained that it was a scam.
I began to ponder the effectiveness of Facebook’s privacy settings, as this incident happened four months after Facebook changed its default privacy settings from ‘public’ to ‘friends only,’ and included a privacy check-up option, which ensures users that their posts are shared with only friends. However, Facebook still retained the right to sell user information to advertisers, which has been a major source of controversy.
In addition, members of the LGBTQ community were outraged when Facebook shut down user profiles of drag queens and transgender people who did not comply with their user name policy which permits only birth names.
Then Ello stepped in. Contrary to Facebook, Ello’s manifesto states that the user is “not a product,” and promises an ad-free social network along with the use of pseudonyms. Ello is not the anti-Facebook that it presents itself to be, however: I suspect that, sooner or later, it will either begin to charge fees for features, or will backtrack on its manifesto and allow advertisements to permeate the network.
Ello claims to be ad-free, but allows mass-marketing [through brand profile pages].
According to Ello’s website, there will be no charge for users at the basic level, but there will be the option to purchase special features to support the company. The network’s founders argue that this business plan could generate enough money to keep the site ad-free, but I find this unlikely. Like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, Ello will soon have to resort to selling ads to maintain itself as it gains popularity.
Social networks must have the money to provide faster and safer services across various platforms. Relying on ad revenues, rather than paid memberships, has historically been the most successful business strategy to garner revenue, as people seem to be more willing to tolerate ads than to fork over money for a membership.
Furthermore, the social network ironically permits advertisers to create brand profile pages; Ello founder Paul Budnitz even has a brand page for his bicycle company. This is a highly hypocritical concept — Ello claims to be ad-free, though it still allows mass-marketing.
The network further harbours a hidden elitism. While Facebook and Twitter allow users to register to use their networks instantly, anyone who wishes to use Ello must request an invite by submitting their email address. The network’s slow, invite-only system has led to so much frustration that users are now purchasing invites on Ebay for over $500, to avoid waiting.
Overall, Ello portrays itself as an exclusive, ‘hipster’ club. Its monochromatic logo and Marxist-like slogans further affirm this secretive, elitist image. I believe that the internet should be an open place, but unfortunately Ello dismisses the idea. For these reasons, I will take this social network off my ‘To Do’ list, while opting for something a little more open and commercial.
