Do you know BeReal? It is THE social network that has been going up for a few months. The concept is simple: every day, at a random time, the user receives a push notification from the application. From this moment, it has 3 minutes to take a picture. The latter simultaneously captures the front and back of the phone (the face is therefore visible in selfie mode + what is in front of the person). It is a “raw” moment of his day. One photo per day maximum, without filter, without artifice, without the possibility of choosing the timing that suits you and without the time to put yourself on stage. If the BeReal application knows this success, it is because it has literally taken the opposite course to all the other social platforms.
And yet… At the end of August, Instagram was already working on the development of a similar feature. A little later, Snapchat announced that it would do the same and a few days ago, TikTok was also getting started with the upcoming launch of TikTok Now, which uses exactly the same mechanics. Is it theft? Plagiarism? The practice is not new to the industry. In its time, Instagram launched stories in front of the success of Snapchat, then reels to copy TikTok, Twitter launched Spaces following the success of Clubhouse and so on. Why do social networks systematically copy what is (vaguely) starting to work elsewhere?
What is the strategy, the vision of the company? Is there still a strategy? Most social networks stood out when they were launched with a simple and original promise: Facebook allowed you to keep in touch with your friends, Instagram offered the possibility of creating a kind of daily photo album, Snapchat allowed you to show yourself in a more natural and spontaneous day, etc. Users had a fairly clear view of what they might find on each platform, with most often complementary to each other.
However, by dint of “enhancing” new features, new options, by dint of wanting to seduce as many users as possible and being afraid of missing the train of the next hype, some platforms have become completely distorted, with a questionable success rate. How many evolutions have been abandoned along the way? How many features offered without consistency have flopped? Who has ever posted stories on Facebook (since gone)? Who has ever used Instagram’s Shopping tab (soon to be removed)? Who remembers Facebook’s Lasso app or IGTV? Without forgetting, more recently, the change of interface of Instagram which angered users and forced the platform to backtrack.
If, as for any company, adapting, developing, taking into account the evolution of the needs and desires of its customers is normal, sometimes, the choices question. So, out of fear of TikTok, Instagram was ready to completely question its identity. It is the same with BeReal, which will certainly lead to a less significant change (it will only be one more feature), but which, from the point of view of the image, seems to be an inconsistent choice, if not is absurd as the two apps have opposite promises. To signal such excitement as soon as a new application makes a little talk regarding it does not send a very reassuring sign on the way in which these companies are managed. It is hard to imagine Coca-Cola changing its recipe or its communication strategy as soon as a new brand of soda grabs some market share.
The supremacy of these few platforms is such that the likelihood of a sudden and imminent downfall is low. Nevertheless, between societal controversies and these bad choices, some platforms are undermining their sympathy capital and threatening their own future. What is the image of Facebook with the public, and especially the youngest, today? What will Instagram be like in a few months if these perpetual and incomprehensible changes continue? How to convince future generations to register on a platform that does not have a clear and original promise? Future Internet users, not constrained by force of habit, will undoubtedly prefer to explore and appropriate original territories rather than join these behemoths which offer the same thing as their neighbors and accumulate more or less useful and accomplished functionalities.
For brands too, these permanent developments raise questions. Obviously, it is impossible, today, to imagine depriving ourselves of such channels of communication and such an audience. And even if the companies provide the revenue of the platforms, they remain dependent on the latter and their choices. It is therefore sometimes difficult to establish long-term editorial strategies when every six months, the platforms evolve, offer new functionalities, modify their algorithm to favor a particular format or type of content. This can give the impression of wanting to build on unstable foundations. However, social networks are only a tool in the service of brand messages and speeches. If the editorial bias is strong and relevant, regardless of platform developments, the message will continue to have effect. It will just be necessary to succeed in transmitting it to the right place and at the right time.
Then begins a balancing act where it is necessary to adapt to these perpetual changes in platforms without betraying oneself or questioning everything. More than ever, the “winning” brands will be those that manage to stick to their initial strategies, define long-term editorial lines and stay true to their ideas. Those who manage not to scatter, not to throw themselves on each novelty without thinking regarding the corresponding objectives and the needs of their targets.
A real challenge so that, unlike social networks, brands continue to surprise with their plurality, inventiveness and longevity.
(The forums published are the responsibility of their authors and do not engage CB News).
