However, agreed it needs to make money. The great beauty of facebook is that it is real user content, whose only influence would seem to be the users peer group.

I dont know the answer, but I suggest that it may lie in the very strength of facebook - its ability to build a community. Facebook doesnt exist without its community.

Therefore why not ask the community? They may well be able to determine an answer!

Facebook may become one of the first democratised on-line communities, where the users have more influence than the share holders.

I’m with you with in regard to becoming a culture of ‘less’ - that seismic shift is happening right now regardless. although there are a lot of people just itching to get back to where things ‘were’… even though we know that’s not a sustainable option.

I like the idea of creating additional value (content) for the user, as suppose to creating some kind of compromised value for everyone. i have read that facebook is ’struggling’ in the revenue category, so i think they’ll have to do something. you’re right in assuming that ‘customers’ would be turned off, especially if they knew their social wire was being tapped. so there’d definitely need to be an opt-in policy!

Your comments raised some great thoughts about social networks for the greater good, our culture, etc. it’s probably going to spur another post in regard to the economy, social tools, and financial education (via mint).

Facebook could likely develop a decent revenue stream by allowing marketers to learn from their customer base. But I don’t think they should. Call me a heretic, but given our recent economic crisis, I think we as business people need to stop the culture of “more.” By that, I mean adopting a mindset of “responsible capitalism,” which means that we stop and ask ourselves: “Is that really beneficial to our society? Our culture? Our health?” That means we may give up revenue streams that are tempting for the sake of the greater good.

Recently, I read an article by that founder of Papa John’s. In Europe, he was asked if he was concenrned about the impact of the British government’s anti-obesity drive on pizza sales. His response:

“No. Pizza’s actually healthy for you if you don’t eat too much of it,” Schnatter replied, adding, “You can’t eat five or six slices but if you eat one or two slices it’s very nutritious.”

The presenter suggested shareholders might take issue with his suggestion. But I argue he has exactly the right perspective. Encouraging people to eat too much pizza is a bad thing. It could be done through clever marketing. But it shouldn’t. I’ll tell you one thing - my next Pizza is going to be from Pappa John’s.

So back to my Facebook opinion. Just because they could make money on allowing marketers and researchers to learn about their behavior doesn’t mean they should. I’m intrigued by your ideas around marketing-oriented social networks. That might work as long as one had control over whether you wanted to see that information or not. I just think the potential to turn off your customers is very, very high when it appears that everybody is constantly shilling something for some reward.

Facebook exists because of its ability to build community. Any revenue they make must result from that core purpose and not betray the reason they exist. Here’s an idea: What if they focus on creating content? HBO-quality content only available on Facebook (look at Hulu and networks’ online efforts). That seems to fit into their core purpose of community while providing an alternative revenue stream.

Stream of consciousness here, but your entry really made some neurons fire….