According to my News Feed, I am not the only person getting fed up with Facebook’s layout change. I understand that social media sites need to stay on the upper edge of technology and must adapt to new trends online. What’s wrong with a solid identity, though? I liked that Twitter was Twitter, Facebook was Facebook and Google+ was Google+. Facebook’s new layout, however, attempts to combine all three services with its new “Lists” and “Subscribe” sections.
True, Facebook has offered “Lists” for quite sometime. However, now these lists are on my home screen, begging me to add friends to the list. It is convenient for seeing a news feed from only certain friends, but I don’t want to do that. Especially when I have friends in the “University of Missouri” list and friends in the “University of Missouri-Columbia” list. It’s just confusing and unnecessary.
The “Subscribe” service really bothers me, too. It’s a blatant attempt to horn in on Twitter’s premise: reading people’s posts without the need for a mutual “friendship,” as on Facebook. With Twitter, I follow celebrities that I think are hilarious. I get to read ridiculous things Mindy Kaling says, or Stephen Colbert’s tweets from the set of “The Colbert Report.” The great thing is that I can read these without needing Kaling’s or Colbert’s reciprocation of my “follow.” I don’t need them to confirm that I’m allowed to read their tweets.
This is very similar to how Facebook’s “Subscribe” works. Why can’t Facebook just accept Twitter’s premise and leave it be? Does Facebook really have to take every idea and try to incorporate it? I know I’d prefer to keep it the same as it has been. Until the new version settles down from annoyance to “whatever,” you can find me on Twitter or even Google+.