What are the new Facebook Emoji’s REALLY for?

Facebook “Reactions” are here. What fresh hell is this?

Allegedly, users have been asking for an “unlike” button for a decade, as a counterweight to the ubiquitous “like” button. Really? Well, maybe. But when Facebook tell us that they are making changes to improve our user experience, warning lights flash on my map. I’ve heard that one before.

Remember when you first signed up for Facebook? You had to go through page after page of product categories, films, books, etc., indicating your preferences, in order to complete your profile. This, you were told, was necessary so Facebook coud serve up the most relevant content and thus “improve your experience.” We fell for it, like the new-born social media lambs we were. Fast-forward nearly a decade and, whoops, privacy is a thing of the past, and your Facebook feed is out of control. What used to be an intimate party for friends, family, ex-work colleagues, and acquaintances (plus people you have forgotten how you acquired along the way) has morphed into a mixture of a political convention, a newsroom, and a sales conference. The party still going on, sort of, but it’s hard to hold a conversation over the racket being made by the “likes” of Gizmodo, BuzzFeed, the Guardian, Distractify, and the advertising of many, many brands. And it is, of course, the “likes” that have caused this problem, unwisely dished out willy-nilly, not realising the recipients would infer a free invitation to the party for the rest of eternity.

Not that we should complain, after all we’re the ones that “liked” these attention grabbing, content-drug pushers in the first place, and we can get rid of them at any time, or at least we can now, since the experience of “un-liking” is no longer a Kafkaesque experience. 

Anyway, back to those new Facebook Reaction buttons, what’s my reaction? Mainly bemusement. Does it improve the fun? Not sure yet. Certainly not as much as some harder-hitting negative Emoji’s would have been. Facebook didn’t include negative buttons (apart from the “angry” face, on which more in a minute), because they are not “social”. Fair enough. It is easy to imagine the damage trolls and bullies could do with these. On the other hand, I’m not sure the Mr Angry button really does the job. If you click the angry button does it indicate that you are angry with the content, the poster of the content, or both? Does using the sad-face button indicate the person’s post make you feel sad, or you think the person is a sad case for having shared it? Actually, this point applies to all of the buttons, in the same way as it did to the good old “like” button-friends tend to like the posts of friends, irrespective of the actual content. They are indicating that they like the person as much as they are approving of his or her post. However, the situation is more complex when we consider the “reactions” to brand messages.

In answer to the question I posed at the beginning of this article, brands and advertising is what the new Facebook Emoji’s are really all about: fresh data and insight which can be sold to advertisers, and there’s nothing wrong with that. But it does annoy me that this is presented to users as some long-awaited gift. Does anyone still think that Facebook has our best interests at heart? The idea that they have put this huge amount of effort and money into the development of the new reaction buttons to satisfy the demands of users is laughable. Since when did they take any notice of what users actually want? If they did they might have paid a lot more income tax in the UK for a start.

The new Emoji’s promise advertisers new ways to learn about us: not just whether we “like” one of their posts or ads, but a more nuanced, emotional reaction which they can use to sharpen their future messages and content. Counting clicks on different reaction buttons will be a damned sight easier than trying to make sense of the rambling comments left by Facebook users. This will add to the rich data Facebook has collected on its users and, in time, it should further enhance the unparalleled targeting opportunities already on offer. According to my ex-colleague Paul Frampton, in his excellent article about the future of social media, things are set to get even better for advertisers with “visibility into sales conversion data”.

I do wonder if the new reaction buttons will really give advertisers what they need. There are some obvious wins, for example the “angry” button will be very useful, allowing brands to identify and target disgruntled customers of their competitors. However, I can’t help but feel that the ambiguities mentioned above will cause some problems further down the line when brands start to analyse the new data.

Interestingly, advertiser reactions have been mixed, one might say ambiguous. There is a general gnashing of teeth over the fact that they cannot use the new buttons immediately - until further notice the clicking of any of the buttons will be counted as “likes”. It is unsurprising that Facebook wants to allow people to get used to using the Emoji’s before letting advertisers loose with them.  Most seem to see the potential to improve work and results, once Facebook allows them access.

So, in conclusion, I have to say that, whilst I don’t “Heart” or “Wow!” these new buttons, the very idea doesn’t make me “Angry” either.  For all the potential problems ahead, I really hope this will help brands to create higher quality, more relevant advertising and content.  That would really improve my “user experience.”