Will Instagram lose its true identity? Negative reactions such as this one marked the day Instagram was gobbled up by the social-network giant Facebook for a whopping $1 billion. But I can safely say that this is just the tip of the iceberg, if we were to consider the quantum of backlash that came from the quarters of prolific, passionate, long-term Instagram aficionados.
Little surprising, considering that the most celebrated of those who embraced the mobile photo-sharing app started out with an anti-Facebook sentiment. To find their precious, closely knit exclusive circle being suddenly sabotaged by the very brand they considered detrimental to their interests and injurious to their own personea, was a tad too bitter a pill to swallow.
There was an uproar of sorts, with angry patrons of the platform firing away in protest against this move through all available online platforms and many users vowing to delete the app before the ageing, mainstream corporate leviathan could trample over their core identity. According to a social-media sniffing service, just 12 per cent of the total comments were positive, while 10 per cent registered their utter disgust and another 10 per cent promised to quit Instagram.
Before we delve deeper into why the community is so livid over this move, it may be pertinent to look at why the 'ageing' social-networking giant scooped up this ‘no-revenue making’ retro-ized photo-sharing app site for such a huge price.
Facebook is an ambling, cash-rich giant now, with its user base trending ever closer to 1 billion. And there are more than a handful of reasons why a company like Instagram would cause a glint in Facebook’s eye. For starters, Facebook is already well into being a mature platform whose erstwhile ‘hip communities’ are already attired in the ‘parents’ suit and in turn are attracting grandparents as well. In that sense, Facebook has ‘mid-life crisis syndrome’: It has started sporting a wrinkle or two and badly needs to put on a cool façade. This is one of the primary reasons the 'hep' audiences of a platform like Instagram would fit the bill perfectly.
And let us not forget the fact that Facebook’s own mobile application sucks, and acquisition of this famously differentiated mobile sharing app would add the much-needed user experience. Rightfully so, given that Instagram topped the charts as the most popular app in the iTunes App Store and is drifting in similar directions with the launch of the new Android version (a reported 6 million downloads in five days).
Then there is the lack of critical mass in terms of data needed to understand the audience psychographics. Facebook needs oodles more data that can enable the next level of audience targeting and advertising, which in turn could possibly be a route to boosting advertising revenues.
Last but not least, let’s not ‘not acknowledge’ the constant threat of Google’s acquisition machine waiting on the sidelines to snap up any hipster that may trundle along, such that its monopolistic machinery can embed more glitter into the walls of its already colossal fortress.
Now, consider the disgruntled junkies of Instagram. Are their sentiments justified? Maybe not, but methinks Instagrammers may have a good set of reasons for harbouring such a sentiment. Let’s look at a few.
To begin with, when a big company takes over the reins of a smaller company with a unique niche, the chances are high that the innate, original essence of the smaller company will be lost forever, which means that the cardinal reasons behind the ever-growing loyal, fan base slowly but surely melt away. Look at Facebook itself, and it doesn’t take much to recollect where it started off and where it is today after unending tampering with its core essence.
Secondly, consider the fact that Instagram’s core audience base of hipsters has a highly differentiated profile: that of free-wheeling creative souls who revel in the spirit of freedom and consider themselves the antithesis of the increasingly boring residents of the Facebook continent. Alas, what would happen to this authenticity of differentiated, user-generated content, for the people, by the people, when the Facebook audiences surge in?
Third, any guesses as to what would transpire when the hitherto clean and green backyards of a close-knit community that revels in its uncontaminated environs, start getting increasingly polluted and cluttered with disruptive advertising messages that the ‘acquirer’ brings in? I can definitely empathize with the mental state of a community whose exclusive private space gets disrupted with the cacophony of commercialization!
What about privacy? Facebook would surely love to be able to drill into the private lives of the 30-million-strong Instragram audience, slicing and dicing data to create psychographics that in turn would power a new audience-targeting machine.
I can see why uncle Facebook was trigger-happy when it came to snapping up this young, trendy, vibrant, hip and possibly ‘upcoming threat’. But can the fact that yet another ‘indigenous’ digital habitat runs an imminent risk of contamination and dissolution of its true essence be gulped down easily?
Let me confess that I am a firm believer of everything original, everything indigenous, everything authentic, everything uncontaminated.
So should it be of surprise that my immediate reaction is a vigorous, frantic 'No'?