Researchers Compare Facebook To Disease, Say Die-Off Is Coming

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
1
0
Researchers Compare Facebook To Disease, Say Die-Off Is Coming


A pair of Princeton researchers using "epidemiological modeling of online social network dynamics" say that Facebook will see a rapid decline in users over the next few years.

An awful lot of people use Facebook. An awful lot of people died of the Black Death. What's the link? According to Princeton University researchers John Cannarella and Joshua A. Spencer, the rise and fall of online social networks [OSNs] like MySpace and Facebook are analogous to infection by, and recovery from, disease.

"The application of disease-like dynamics to OSN adoption follows intuitively, since users typically join OSNs because their friends have already joined," their research paper states. "The precedent for applying epidemiological models to non-disease applications has previously been set by research focused on modeling the spread of less-tangible applications such as ideas. Ideas, like diseases, have been shown to spread infectiously between people before eventually dying out, and have been successfully described with epidemiological models."

If the results of the research are even close to accurate, the news is not good for Facebook. "Having validated the irSIR [Infectious Recovery SIR] model of OSN dynamics on Google data for search query MySpace, we then applied the model to the Google data for search query Facebook," it concludes. "Extrapolating the best fit model into the future suggests that Facebook will undergo a rapid decline in the coming years, losing 80 percent of its peak user base between 2015 and 2017."

It's easy enough to look at this as an exercise conducted by bored academics with too much time on their hands, but as they note in their introduction, there are real-world applications for this sort of thing too. MySpace was founded in 2003 and was purchased by News Corp in 2005 for $580 million, but after peaking at 75.9 million unique monthly visits in 2008, it faded to irrelevance by 2011 and was sold that year for just $35 million. Facebook acknowledged in October 2013 that it had experienced a decline in usage [http://techcrunch.com/2013/10/30/facebook-teens-drop/] among younger teens in the U.S., the first time it has reported such a loss.

Source: Cornell University Library [http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.4208]


Permalink
 

The Material Sheep

New member
Nov 12, 2009
339
0
0
Did you misspell disease or was that intentional? Oh yes it was a misspelling, pardon for the relatively pointless post other then questioning that.
 

Dr.Awkward

New member
Mar 27, 2013
692
0
0
Guess I'm immune then. So after Facebook it might be Twitter, and then we'll go back to self-confined BBSes that individually focus on a single subject again? I'm fine with that. No need for EVERYONE to get involved with one thing.
 

Falterfire

New member
Jul 9, 2012
810
0
0
As fun as it is to draw connections between unrelated things, it seems like a poor idea to assume that since one disease matched the pattern of growth and remission seen in one social network that you can apply this to all social networks.

I don't doubt that Facebook will sooner or later lose its pull, but it's not just going to die because everybody will spontaneously say "Oh, looks like it's time to stop using Facebook. Time to quit."

Facebook still offers something that is arguably very important at this point - Finding ways to communicate with other people when you only know their name. Phone books aren't as useful now that quite a few people (especially College students) don't have home phones and there isn't even such thing as an Email Book. I know quite a few people (myself included) who have a Facebook and never use it except as a way to contact people who I otherwise don't have a line to.
 

Bug MuIdoon

New member
Mar 28, 2013
285
0
0
You needed some researchers to tell you this?
The IT Crowd already covered this!
I stopped using facebook, and most other 'social' networking site a good few years a go. When your Grandma can see pictures of you drunk, naked, doing drugs and having sex you know there's absolutely no need to use it.
 

Remus

Reprogrammed Spambot
Nov 24, 2012
1,698
0
0
Now to apply this model to MMOs. With WoW dying off, how long before the next great game hits that attracts enough users to create a similar pattern? And would F2P be considered as a mutation of the MMO genome that may create a secondary infection for some games while not working at all for others?
 

Owyn_Merrilin

New member
May 22, 2010
7,370
0
0
Falterfire said:
As fun as it is to draw connections between unrelated things, it seems like a poor idea to assume that since one disease matched the pattern of growth and remission seen in one social network that you can apply this to all social networks.

I don't doubt that Facebook will sooner or later lose its pull, but it's not just going to die because everybody will spontaneously say "Oh, looks like it's time to stop using Facebook. Time to quit."

Facebook still offers something that is arguably very important at this point - Finding ways to communicate with other people when you only know their name. Phone books aren't as useful now that quite a few people (especially College students) don't have home phones and there isn't even such thing as an Email Book. I know quite a few people (myself included) who have a Facebook and never use it except as a way to contact people who I otherwise don't have a line to.
I think a better model for the way social networks die is subscription based MMOs, which if you look at the one on top, tends to die because something significantly better comes in and kicks its ass. First there was Neverwinter Nights, then Ultima Online knocked it off its perch, then Everquest took it down, and then WoW came along, and it's been top dog ever since.

Similarly, first there was Livejournal, then there was Myspace, now Facebook rules the roost. It's not going anywhere until people both get fed up with it and something significantly better comes along. Right now the only other real contender is Google+, and Google's managed to piss too many people off with the way they're pushing it for people to move over in large numbers. I think I've got four or five separate G+ accounts at this point, because they just get tossed in every time you make an account for one of Google's other services, and I make a point of never using it because of how obnoxious they've been about it.
 

Sniper Team 4

New member
Apr 28, 2010
5,433
0
0
Wouldn't surprise me. Twitter does seem to be getting more attention now, and friends of mine who used to be on Facebook a lot are not there anymore. I'll still use it for a long time though, as it's a good way to keep in contact and plan stuff with some of my other friends.
 

Li Mu

New member
Oct 17, 2011
552
0
0
I'm all about VK anyway. I spend far more time on VKontakte (russian facebook) than FB anyway. There's far less 'useless friend spam'.
 

MCerberus

New member
Jun 26, 2013
1,168
0
0
Analyst Reports Facebook Dying

also known as:
This Just in: Today is a day that ends in 'Y'
 

Hagi

New member
Apr 10, 2011
2,741
0
0
Falterfire said:
Facebook still offers something that is arguably very important at this point - Finding ways to communicate with other people when you only know their name. Phone books aren't as useful now that quite a few people (especially College students) don't have home phones and there isn't even such thing as an Email Book. I know quite a few people (myself included) who have a Facebook and never use it except as a way to contact people who I otherwise don't have a line to.
That's the part that makes this model realistic though.

As soon as some people start becoming 'resistant' to Facebook and don't use it anymore then all those other users won't be able to find those people anymore and will instead look elsewhere and possibly stay there. Subsequently there's even more people that can't be found on Facebook that will spur even more to look elsewhere.

I don't know if it will happen in the next few years. But I do think it's rather likely that if/when Facebook dies off it will be very rapidly in an endless spiral of people leaving causing others to in turn leave themselves.
 

mattaui

New member
Oct 16, 2008
689
0
0
This is one of my favorite headline/picture combos on The Escapist in recent memory.

But I've always compared Facebook to a disease anyway. A horrible social disease that your friends give to you, again and again.
 

MorganL4

Person
May 1, 2008
1,364
0
0
Falterfire said:
As fun as it is to draw connections between unrelated things, it seems like a poor idea to assume that since one disease matched the pattern of growth and remission seen in one social network that you can apply this to all social networks.

I don't doubt that Facebook will sooner or later lose its pull, but it's not just going to die because everybody will spontaneously say "Oh, looks like it's time to stop using Facebook. Time to quit."

Facebook still offers something that is arguably very important at this point - Finding ways to communicate with other people when you only know their name. Phone books aren't as useful now that quite a few people (especially College students) don't have home phones and there isn't even such thing as an Email Book. I know quite a few people (myself included) who have a Facebook and never use it except as a way to contact people who I otherwise don't have a line to.

Yeah, I would have to agree, I mean they pointed to Myspace as the example of historical proof. The thing is, that Myspace died SPECIFICALLY because Facebook overshadowed it, and provided a more desirable interface. In otherwords, I don't see Facebook dying until someone comes up with a better version.
 

Tiamat666

Level 80 Legendary Postlord
Dec 4, 2007
1,012
0
0
Wow, what amazing discovery. Facebook experienced a sort of exponential growth, before slowly balancing out. Like diseases. And like many, many other things. In fact, this pattern of exponential growth is one of the most common occurrences in nature, if not the universe. So everything must somehow be interconnected... population growth, internet connectivity, the rise of economies... it blows my mind.

Makes you wonder though, why they chose diseases for their incredible analysis, and not one of the million other possible things which might in fact lead to a million different conclusions..
 

theApoc

New member
Oct 17, 2008
252
0
0
Falterfire said:
As fun as it is to draw connections between unrelated things, it seems like a poor idea to assume that since one disease matched the pattern of growth and remission seen in one social network that you can apply this to all social networks.

I don't doubt that Facebook will sooner or later lose its pull, but it's not just going to die because everybody will spontaneously say "Oh, looks like it's time to stop using Facebook. Time to quit."

Facebook still offers something that is arguably very important at this point - Finding ways to communicate with other people when you only know their name. Phone books aren't as useful now that quite a few people (especially College students) don't have home phones and there isn't even such thing as an Email Book. I know quite a few people (myself included) who have a Facebook and never use it except as a way to contact people who I otherwise don't have a line to.
The problem is that facebook is controlling to a certain extent, who you communicate with and the answer to this will be a more focused, centralized networking tool, your mobile device.

A lot of people are looking at ways of pulling you out from under the umbrella of social media sites. Imagine the same connectivity, except with complete control over your data, and how it is used. The day someone cracks that code is the day facebook and twitter go by by...
 

Elvaril

New member
Dec 31, 2010
124
0
0
Most people willingly join social media sites because they want to join them. Most people don't willingly infect themselves with the plague. This analogy seems pretty off.
 

oldtaku

New member
Jan 7, 2011
639
0
0
Die-Off is Coming
We can only hope.

Elvaril said:
Most people willingly join social media sites because they want to join them. Most people don't willingly infect themselves with the plague. This analogy seems pretty off.
Not all of them. Most people joining Facebook under the age of 55 (definitely under 25) now are on it because the Olds (parents, grandparents, other family) insist they join so they can keep an eye on them. People on Google+ are on it because Google is constantly trying to trick you into joining it, and makes it so annoying that eventually people just give up and join even if they never post anything. If people joined G+ voluntarily they'd have less than 1/100th the users they're claiming.

I'd say Twitter and Snapchat and WhatsApp are still in the 'because they want to join them' category.
 

Arnoxthe1

Elite Member
Dec 25, 2010
3,391
2
43
Like the dinosaur...

Cool, can we get back to the Forums Disease now? I have no idea why so many people just stopped catching that one.
 

Tim_LRR

New member
Nov 16, 2009
52
0
0
Odd that they would base this on the SEARCH TERM "Facebook". Maybe people are just getting smarter about actually entering the URL rather than having to search for Facebook in Google and then click on the link?

Or did I misread?