adminJune 3, 2018
tot333-1280x493.jpg

5min3710

About ninety-five percent of teens today have access to a smartphone and about forty-five percent of teens are almost constantly online. But did you know that younger internet users do not connect on Facebook as much as their seniors or older peers do? Although Facebook dominated social media across all age groups over the past years, today it has taken the back seat to YouTube, Instagram, and Snapchat among the teens.

Of course, Facebook is still being used by over half of all teens. But compared to YouTube, Instagram, and Snapchat, Facebook has clearly taken a back seat because most teens prefer to use the three aforementioned social media platforms. Facebook did manage to outpace Twitter, Tumblr, and Reddit.

Overall, Facebook is still, by a very wide margin, the biggest social network worldwide. As of the first quarter of last year, Facebook had almost 2 billion global monthly active users, of which 1.74 billion are mobile monthly active users. But it could not be denied that Facebook’s popularity has definitely plummeted among teenagers since they are ditching Facebook and picking YouTube, Snapchat, and Instagram.

A Change in Norm Among Teens

The social media habits of teenagers nowadays have, in some ways, changed. In 2015, a measly twenty-four percent of teens went constantly online, which is essentially half of the number that does so today.

Three years ago, Facebook was still the dominant social media platform on the Internet. A whopping seventy-one percent of teens said that they used Facebook, while forty-one percent said that they used it often. Instagram came in second with fifty-two percent of teens saying that they use it, and almost twenty percent said that they used it often. At the time, YouTube wasn’t even named among the most popular online platform choices of teens.

Today, teens are picking YouTube and ditching Facebook. I guess I should say that it isn’t that surprising because trends are always changing. What may be famous or popular now may be forgotten three to five years from now. Of course, that might not be the case in some things.

A Reason for the Sudden Change

The young teens of today have constant changing tastes in social media. They seldom stick with that their older peers liked in different aspects and trends. Although with regard to social media, there could be other factors that explain what it is that is chasing away young teens nowadays.

The organization did not bother to speculate on a reason for this, although in general, teens often turn away from services or things that become mainstream or when it is used by their parents.

One possible reason could be that they don’t want all of the services and features being provided by Facebook. One other possible reason could be that they mainly want a platform to connect with their friends while also staying relevant; they don’t want to see motivational memes, political nonsense, fake news, spam, or any kind of advertising. Young teens of today might prefer to connect in a private and protected environment.

A Concern for Teens’ Safety on Social Media

Although there are a lot of reminders and precautions being taken, some experts express their concerns about young users on social media. As a matter of fact, the young teens themselves have a divided opinion about the subject matter. They have, in fact, reckoned whether social media is good for them; almost a quarter thinks that it has a negative effect, while a third says that it’s a good thing, and nearly half think that it is neutral.


adminMay 31, 2018
tot324-1280x672.jpg

5min2910

Net Neutrality is a hot topic in the world of US politics these days but what exactly is it?  The issue of Net Neutrality is said to have united those on the Right and those on the Left, Republican, and Democrat.  Net Neutrality is the premise that internet providers can not throttle or slow down certain websites based on that internet provider’s economic and or political motives.

The greater issue of the free market vs. government intervention is demonstrated perfectly in this hot button issue.  Those against Net Neutrality, such as current US president Donald Trump, argue that having Net Neutrality is too much government intervention in the free market.  Furthermore, internet cable company providers, such as Comcast and Verizon, have very valid arguments that certain websites, such as YouTube and NetFlix, are essentially bandwidth hogs.  As you may very well know, both YouTube and NetFlix are video streaming websites which demand a great amount of bandwidth from Internet providers.  Comcast and Verizon’s argument goes a bit like this:  Imagine two customers, both pay the same rate, but one customer is a 16-year-old who uses YouTube all day and the other customer is an 80-year-old grandmother who does nothing more with her internet service than read static websites that tell stories about history.

The infrastructure needed to support the 16-year old’s internet usage is obviously greater than the 80-year-old woman’s internet usage, thus the profit margins between these two customers are not the same for Internet providers.  Therefore, according to the likes of Comcast and Verizon, YouTube and NetFlix should have to pay additional for their increased bandwidth needs.  This would essentially result in the 16-year-old having to pay more for his internet “package,” as the cost would be passed on to the consumer and not to YouTube and Netflix directly.

For those who are fighting to keep Net Neutrality, their fear is that the Internet providers will simply try to introduce their own version of YouTube and NetFlix by offering clone services for cheap.  There is also the dark nefarious fear that entire news websites will be “blocked” out by Internet companies that do not like the politics of such banned websites.

As it stands right now, the internet is essential “even” or somewhat “open” in America right now, but without Net Neutrality the internet could resemble something more like a cable TV package.  As you may know, cable TV packages are the dread of the entire consumer industry.  Overpriced and bundled with a bunch of crap, most cable TV packages are despised by Americans a million times over.  Without Net Neutrality we could be looking at a future where getting YouTube and NetFlix will cost extra.  It is my dear opinion that the free market people, who argue against having Net Neutrality, have one fatal flaw in their argument:  There is no free market in the world of Internet providers.

Internet providers are monopolies who collude with the government to keep competition out.  Therefore, internet providers need to either be regulated with Net Neutrality, or some derivative of it, or they need to be broken up into smaller companies like Bell Atlantic was in the 1980s.  The future of Net Neutrality is uncertain as the battle to maintain it or destroy it rages on in Washington D.C.  If you are not American, you may think that this has nothing to do with you, but you would be wrong.  The future of Net Neutrality in America will lead the way for Internet providers all over the globe, as the US is always a trend maker in many markets.



About us

Leverage agile frameworks to provide a robust synopsis for high level overviews. Iterative approaches to corporate strategy foster collaborative thinking to further the overall value proposition. Organically grow the holistic world view of disruptive innovation via workplace diversity and empowerment.


CONTACT US

CALL US ANYTIME