I will never know if my suspicion on why Facebook and Google Plus want to mandate their users to don real names has any merit, but I think I want to point it out anyway. I think it’s for an economic reason which explains why Facebook and Google Plus want users to use real names on their social networks and not nicknames.
It’s obvious Facebook and Google Plus want their partners to see their users as real people and real accounts and not some fake, make up usernames and nicknames. Knowing with real active users who use real names on social networks, the sky is the limit for sparks of new partnerships, ideas, ventures, and innovations to take hold. If this isn’t for the bottom line, then I don’t know what would. Then again, I hate to point something out that is so obvious, because I might be the last person of them all to have do so.
Sure, it’s tempting to think using real names on social networks somehow divert the possibilities of various dangerous activities of how the use of nicknames could encourage, but the realities are things could go both way. The use of real names on social networks doesn’t mean it’s going to be effectively eradicated the dangerous activities that would spur under the use of nicknames, and vice versa. Therefore, economic reason does make more sense in regarding to why Facebook and Google encourage users to use real names.
It’s obvious to see Facebook and Google like to discourage users who want to create too many fake accounts. By now you would say duh, but I would say duh too. It’s the whole point! The point of having or making the appearance of real users ever more transparent so social networks that do promote real names seem to be even more valid than ever, and this might help prolong the relevancy of social networks for some time to come. Just think about this, the next time if you want to join a social network, would you want to join a social network that you think there might be more zombies than real users? Such a social network might not have a mandate to push for using real names, and so in the end it might not be so relevant to the whole Internet scene. Moreover, how can we even dare to try to trust a recommendation from a friend on a social network that lacks real name mandate? It’s not economically wise for such a social network to not mandate the use of real names, right? At the least, great social networks know that by merely declaring a mandate of real name usage can greatly boost their wonderful existences onto a higher plane.
Users want to know the people that they are communicating with in real social networks, albeit they might never be able to truly know the people that they are friending with from the start. It’s the intention that counts, I guess. At the least, users want to know the real names of the strangers who want to friend them, regardless of the intentions that drive the friending in the first place. OK, by now it sounds very much like I’m sort of pointing out the same thing over and over again; I simply put that social networks want users to use real names so the economic future of social networks might be more viable.
Disclaimer of sort: I do not favor either camp, because I favor both! Sort of having a split personality on this matter, I think! I like the idea of having a nickname so I won’t be so open on the Internet, but I also want to know the people I’m communicating with on the Internet are real! Therefore, I do not have a personal view on this, but I just want to point out the obvious reason of why Facebook and Google want users to use real names. Like I said, I’m probably be the last person who takes note of this and makes a big deal out of it!
Inspired by this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/technology/hiding-or-using-your-name-online-and-who-decides.html?_r=1
- Diaspora co-founder Ilya Zhitomirskiy dies at 22 (digitaltrends.com)
- Should should social networking sites be allowed in the workplace? (ritcyberselfdefense.wordpress.com)
- Co-founder of social network Diaspora dies (theglobeandmail.com)
- Diaspora social network’s co-founder dead at 22 (cbc.ca)
- Social Networking: Why? (ritcyberselfdefense.wordpress.com)
- Kleiner Perkins Surveys the Social Landscape (adweek.com)
- Salman Rushdie Slams Facebook For Changing His Name (huffingtonpost.com)
- Following Founder’s Passing, Diaspora Opens Redesigned Alpha To Invitees – TechCrunch (techcrunch.com)
- Facebook hoax: A 14 years old boy got beaten half dead (zdnet.com)
- Co-founder of social network Diaspora dies (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
- Microsoft, Google Struggle With New Face Of Collaboration (informationweek.com)
- If Google+ Facebook equals X. Find X? (marketing.yell.com)
- Diaspora Co-Founder Ilya Zhitomirskiy Dies At 21 (huffingtonpost.com)
- 5 New Social Networks You Should Know About (learningwithtechs.wordpress.com)
- Is Google+ or Facebook Better for Business? (pcworld.com)
- Google+ isn’t a social network: it’s a web spider hungry for your data (telegraph.co.uk)
- Google+ ‘is not a social network’ (telegraph.co.uk)
- Google+ business pages – what you need to know (simplybusiness.co.uk)
- Google backs down, nickname-users win (macleans.ca)
- Why I am not sleeping on Google+ (jeffesposito.com)
- YouTube Testing A Fancy New Look That Focuses On Google+ (GOOG) (businessinsider.com)
- Google, Apple, Facebook Most Desirable Jobs (AAPL, GOOG) (247wallst.com)
- Look At How Google Is Backing Away From The Idea Of Google+ As A Social Network (GOOG) (businessinsider.com)
- Facebook Nears Google Buzz-Like Privacy Settlement with FTC (searchenginewatch.com)
- Silicon Alley Insider: Google Joins The Big Social Fund Started By Kleiner-Perkins Last Year (GOOG) (businessinsider.com)
- The Google Music Store Will Give Away Free Music Every Day (GOOG) (businessinsider.com)