Meta Announces Paid Subscriptions Offering Extra Verification, Promotion, Protection, Support (fb.com) 98
Long-time Slashdot reader destinyland writes: Meta announced a new $11.99-a-month subscription service on Sunday (or $14.99-a-month for Android and iOS). For your money you mainly get the privilege of authenticating your own account with a government ID, so that it can then display the official "verified" badge. (Accounts must have a prior posting history, with account holders verified to be at least 18 years old.)
Meta promises they won't change already-verified Facebook and Instagram accounts — at least, not "as we test and learn." But they immediately follow that sentence by warning that in the longer-term they're "evolving the meaning" of verification, aiming to making everyone want to subscribe. Meta calls this "expanding access."
Paying subscribers will also get:
— Protection from account impersonation (at a higher level that's apparently not made available to non-paying members), including "proactive account monitoring".
— "Help when you need it with access to a real person for common account issues."
— Exclusive "stickers" for Facebook and Instagram Stories and Facebook Reels, plus 100 free Facebook "stars" each month "so you can show your support for other creators."
But most importantly, Meta is also promising to grant "increased visibility and reach" to paying members, promising "prominence" in parts of the service (including search, recommendations, and in comments). Although a footnote warns this may vary — depending on what you're trying to post about — and all content "will be treated according to our existing guidelines for recommendations on Instagram or Facebook and our Content Guidelines."
George Takei once calculated roughly 80% of your friends never see the things you post on Facebook. But now Facebook is deliberately evolving into a two-tiered system where some will always be relegated to less-likely-to-be-seen status, always outshined by wealthier friends with $144 a year to spend on upgrading their Facebook accounts.
The internet already has a two-tiered system for news, where the best news articles are only available to those with the funds to climb over multiple paywalls. But now even the lower tier of discourse — all that non-journalistic content floating around Facebook — will transform from a pool of burbling anger and misinformation into something worse. It's like Facebook's algorithm went from promoting just the most divisive content to promoting content from whoever most desires to foist their ideas onto other people. This may not end well.
Is it just me, or does this seem like a desperate grab for money?
— They're monetizing Meta's inability to stop account impersonators.
— Their announcement admits that "access to account support" remains a top request of their creators. Yet paying members are apparently more likely to get it than non-paying members. Maybe that can be their new marketing slogan. "Help when you need it — sold separately."
— This is happening. It becomes available for purchase this week on Instagram or Facebook in Australia and New Zealand.
Meta promises they won't change already-verified Facebook and Instagram accounts — at least, not "as we test and learn." But they immediately follow that sentence by warning that in the longer-term they're "evolving the meaning" of verification, aiming to making everyone want to subscribe. Meta calls this "expanding access."
Paying subscribers will also get:
— Protection from account impersonation (at a higher level that's apparently not made available to non-paying members), including "proactive account monitoring".
— "Help when you need it with access to a real person for common account issues."
— Exclusive "stickers" for Facebook and Instagram Stories and Facebook Reels, plus 100 free Facebook "stars" each month "so you can show your support for other creators."
But most importantly, Meta is also promising to grant "increased visibility and reach" to paying members, promising "prominence" in parts of the service (including search, recommendations, and in comments). Although a footnote warns this may vary — depending on what you're trying to post about — and all content "will be treated according to our existing guidelines for recommendations on Instagram or Facebook and our Content Guidelines."
George Takei once calculated roughly 80% of your friends never see the things you post on Facebook. But now Facebook is deliberately evolving into a two-tiered system where some will always be relegated to less-likely-to-be-seen status, always outshined by wealthier friends with $144 a year to spend on upgrading their Facebook accounts.
The internet already has a two-tiered system for news, where the best news articles are only available to those with the funds to climb over multiple paywalls. But now even the lower tier of discourse — all that non-journalistic content floating around Facebook — will transform from a pool of burbling anger and misinformation into something worse. It's like Facebook's algorithm went from promoting just the most divisive content to promoting content from whoever most desires to foist their ideas onto other people. This may not end well.
Is it just me, or does this seem like a desperate grab for money?
— They're monetizing Meta's inability to stop account impersonators.
— Their announcement admits that "access to account support" remains a top request of their creators. Yet paying members are apparently more likely to get it than non-paying members. Maybe that can be their new marketing slogan. "Help when you need it — sold separately."
— This is happening. It becomes available for purchase this week on Instagram or Facebook in Australia and New Zealand.
Why do this if wealthy? (Score:5, Interesting)
But now Facebook is deliberately evolving into a two-tiered system where some will always be relegated to less-likely-to-be-seen status, always outshined by wealthier friends with $144 a year to spend on upgrading their Facebook accounts.
Here's a hint, wealthier people do not buy nonsense like this. If anyone is buying this fake clout it's poorer people craving enhanced recognition.
Heck the wealthier people are probably off doing something else altogether rather than spending time on Facebook!
Re:Why do this if wealthy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wealthy people will pay for this if the extra brand recognition or public exposure makes them even wealthier.
For all the others, it's not poor people who will sign up, it's stupid people.
Re: Why do this if wealthy? (Score:4, Insightful)
In other words, the crypto bros and other shady investment types wil use this as a weapon ("verified!"). The rest won't touch it, apart from the naive.
Re: (Score:2)
I can think of friends who probably will pay up. They're the sort of people who have to advertise their lives on social media in order to be seen by their peers. They're the sort of people who absolutely lap up all the timelines, memories, anniversaries, all that sort of stuff that FB for instance throws at people.
My thoughts are that if the free tier would get more advertising, and less likes and comments from their friends, then they'll probably pay up to keep getting their bit of joy every time someone e
Re: (Score:2)
it's stupid people
Of which many are poor.
Re:Why do this if wealthy? (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's a hint, wealthier people do not buy nonsense like this.
Oh boy, you clearly haven't visited a theme park recently. There's two-tier parking pricing, paid ride reservations (express / fast passes to wait in a shorter queue), hell, I don't think it'll be long before they start charging for premium seats on the monorail. People who have money burning a hole in their pocket love spending a few extra bucks to feel superior to the rest of the plebs.
Re: (Score:2)
I flew with Ryanair last month and was given "priority boarding" because I paid for a seat with extra leg room.
When they called "priority boarding" it was more than half the passengers who stood up.
(and after standing in the '"priority" queue for half an hour they let us through a door then made us stand like sardines in a drafty tin corridor for 45 minutes (in winter) before the aircraft was ready)
Re: (Score:3)
Ryanair calls it priority but rather it's more about optimising boarding. Priority boarding is for those who have extra hand luggage, they go in sooner, so that they get a bit more time to place their luggage in empty overhead lockers. Non-priority doesn't get extra carry on luggage, so they should be quicker to get in the plane and go to their seat.
This is all because airports sort of demand that air lines run a tight schedule on how long boarding goes for, so Ryanair is trying to speed up the boarding pro
They do but... (Score:1)
Wealthy people don't go to theme parks
They absolutely do, however they way they do it is much different.
They don't use something like Genie+ or paid quick entry for individual rides.
Instead, they buy VIP guides for the day. The VIP guides tale you in through back entrances to the park so no lines, and they take you to the front of EVERY line for every ride (for rides without express entrances they just take you in through the exit).
These guides usually cost around $700/hour I believe, with something like a
Very different case (Score:2)
Oh boy, you clearly haven't visited a theme park recently. There's two-tier parking pricing, paid ride reservations
I have used those systems before - that's a totally different case.
The park express pass pricing is about preserving time. I don't use it always, but I do use it in cases when it will save me a lot of time for something I really want to ride.
Also the pricing is such that you use it behind an already gated system of expensive park tickets, so the price of an express pass is not out of reach for
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
The irony.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Elon Musk being a chronic Twitter user might have something to say about spending all that time on social media.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Now I can pay to give Facebook my true ID? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why gee, sign me up right this second! I always thought Facebook didn't have enough of my private information. Now I can be fully deanonymized for a mere $12 a month!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why gee, sign me up right this second! I always thought Facebook didn't have enough of my private information. Now I can be fully deanonymized for a mere $12 a month!
Yup ! Cheeper than going to a medical doctor's office.
FB has all the same groping without the "turn your head and cough" routine.
Great idea! (Score:2)
I bet this will be as popular as the new Twitter Blue!
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Facebook has one thing going for it: they're not run by Elon Musk. They are run by Fuckerberg though, so they have their own challenges too.
Re: (Score:2)
They are run by Fuckerberg though, so they have their own challenges too.
Nah, Zuck is just a regular guy who likes hanging out his back yard smoking meats [youtube.com]. He's totally not a reptile in a human suit.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL! (Score:5, Insightful)
Privacy Rapist now wants you to pay them to rape your privacy. Good one Zuck!
Oh fuck, they're serious?
Re: (Score:2)
If you're going to use profanity you need more Funny.
Why didn't you close with "Phuck Zuck and the horse he rode in on"?
Part of the advantage of my pro-freedom anti-greedom tax proposal (of a progressive tax on profits linked to market share) is that it would force the books more open. Where are those profits coming from? As you wrote, everyone suspects Facebook's profits are from various form of privacy rapine, but...
Paid Facebook account (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Probably the sort of people who are trying to con other people and want a badge to prove they're "legit".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
What kind of a muppet would actually pay to go on Facebook?
What kind of a nerd would actually pay to go on Slashdot?
From Slashdot Subscriptions page [slashdot.org]:
Please Note: Buying or gifting of a new subscription is not available at the moment. We apologize for the inconvenience. This downtime though does not effect your current active subscription in any way. We will keep you posted on the latest
Slashdot Subscriptions [slashdot.org] disappeared from Slashdot FAQ [slashdot.org]. It is still possible to navigate to that page by clicking 'Next' on About Slashdot [slashdot.org].
Subscribing is strictly optional. The Subscriptions benefits include:
- You get an asterisk appended to your user ID for all comments you post while you're a subscriber.
- You can see each story 10-20 minutes before it goes "live.".
- Getting rid of ads on the page. 1000 ad free pages for $5.
- You can add up to 400 friends and foes, instead of being limited to 200.
- You can get a message sent to you when people change their relationship to you (friend or foe).
- More choices when writing a journal entry.
- You get a "More Comments" link on your user page and on other users' pages.
- Your personal index feed, linked from the bottom of the homepage, will be customized for your homepage preferences.
Would only pay/subscribe under these conditions: (Score:5, Informative)
No tracking, profiling or ads of any kind. Ever.
Re: (Score:2)
They're taking a page out of Apple's book.
"They're charging me, that means they care about my privacy."
With how deep Meta's brand is in the shitter, they're reaching for anything. Might as well cop from the masters of the Reality Distortion Field. Repeat it thousands of times online and people will start believing.
Re: (Score:2)
I would pay for verified proof that they had completely and permanently deleted the account I made when I was young(er) and stupid(er).
Every time I try to delete my account, I get a bullshit message saying they have "detected a problem" and need my phone number to proceed. Fuck you facebook, you didn't need my phone number to sign up, no fucking way are you getting it now.
Re: (Score:2)
Every time I try to delete my account, I get a bullshit message saying they have "detected a problem" and need my phone number to proceed.
BC: Hello
FB: Hello, we heard that you were attempting to delete your facebook account and we wanted to talk to you about that
BC: How did you get this number, I never gave it to you.
FB: Never mind about that, we promise to never misuse your information
BC: You're calling me now using my information without consent
FB: The owner of the information consent to our use of it
BC: I am the owner of that information
FB: That is a matter of opinion, and not relevant, we are not misusing the information.
BC: WT
The future (Score:3)
Recently, I got into a big argument with a website operator regarding their ad policy for subscriptions. Basically, the site currently shows 8 ads per page view. If you subscribe and pay for an account, you still see 8 ads per page view, but they are somehow "gooder" ads or some BS. They don't reduce the ads, they just... er... give you different ones, I guess?
I don't have a problem with paying a subscription fee, but for heaven's sake, please give me a good reason to do so. Paying for the sake of saying, "I paid for something" isn't going to fly. Even these MBA assholes should understand that no business is sustainable unless it offers users some kind of value. Making people pay so they don't get buried by the algorithm will just drive the masses away, and then the remaining content creators will have no audience at all.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't have a problem with paying a subscription fee, but for heaven's sake, please give me a good reason to do so.
An adult site which shall remain nameless recently started offering the ability to block all of their ads if you buy their NFT. Sure, you're getting something out of it, but... well... you have to buy a damn NFT. That's like selling your soul to the devil.
Actually, I don't even think Satan is quite evil enough to deal in NFTs.
Re: (Score:1)
Adult sites have ads? For what? Blue pills and pumps?
For other adult sites, usually ones in their network unless it's a site like pornhub which will advertise any site.
Oh look, I'm getting modbombed (Score:2)
Another day, another group of downmods from someone who wants to cancel me
Re: (Score:2)
Even these MBA assholes should understand that no business is sustainable unless it offers users some kind of value.
You grossly overrate them.
Stickers!? (Score:2)
But hey, those exclusive stickers!
Re: (Score:2)
Make a Stand (Score:3)
Let me guess... only those who subscribe will have legs.
To be honest (Score:1)
I wasn't expecting something like this to happen until after the government passed some sort of data privacy act. I guess Facebook wants to have the billing system up and running for when that day comes rolling around. Either that, or Meta really did lose a whole lot of monetization potential when Apple yanked the rug out from under them with those privacy features Apple added to iOS.
George Takei once calculated roughly 80% of your friends never see the things you post on Facebook.
Oh my!
Well, the joke's on Facebook, I hardly ever post anything on there anyway. I have an account mostly to keep up with
Offering extra value for a price (Score:3)
Losers (Score:5, Informative)
What kind of loser pays to have their FB posts promoted?
Re:Losers (Score:5, Insightful)
What kind of loser pays to have their FB posts promoted?
Politicians and narcissists, but I repeat myself.
Re: (Score:2)
What kind of loser pays to have their FB posts promoted?
Politicians and narcissists, but I repeat myself.
Not really: not all narcissists are politicians.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
HBO, Capital One, Disney, Walmart... (Score:2)
A web search for top facebook advertisers brought the usual paywalled reports from Statista and Business Insider, plus this which appears to be open access: "Facebook is Crushing It: Which Advertisers are Most Attracted to the Platform?" [mediaradar.com]. From the article:
Payment wrong way round (Score:2)
Should it not be farcebook paying its users some of what it gets by using their data to generate cash ?
Facebook is Free (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does anyone remember that for many years Facebook's sign in page said "It's free and always will be"? That aged well.
Hurting (Score:2)
Incoming class action lawsuit (Score:2)
Re: Incoming class action lawsuit (Score:2)
Business model (Score:3)
Now the eyeballs are encouraged to pay for adverts. They're getting you on the way in and the way out.
Fecebook used to be about connecting friends, but now it seems to make it harder to stay in contact.
Would be easier to go back to email. It has a more personal touch anyway.
Not a good sign (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
I asked my high school kids is they know anyone at school that uses Facebook.
They started to laugh at me. They said no, Facebook is for old people .
Meh (Score:2)
I'm sure they will make a shit load of money but not nearly as much as they are hoping and it will likely accelerate the number of people giving up on them.
Re: (Score:1)
"Facebook is an infinite time sink, perfect for bored people."
Unlike, say, some other websites.
Idiot Identification Stickers (Score:2)
At least it will be easy to see who the true morons are with the 'stickers'.
Will need a sticker blocker script.
Yes, it's a grab for money (Score:2)
>> "Is it just me, or does this seem like a desperate grab for money?" Rest assured, it's not just you... A verified account may warrant a one-time fee for the verification itself, but not a subscription because there is no cost over time. It's the perfect money machine: you work once and get paid forever.
Charity page (Score:2)
This explains a lot. I run a charity event and getting facebook to change details on our page in the last 6 months has become basically impossible.
Paid Subscriptions for Protection (Score:3)
Nice personal data you have there. Shame if something were to happen to it. Better pay us to protect you from the fact that we told you to give us your data.
Wot no NFTs? (Score:3)
Too much (Score:2)
This price of $12/15 a month may be bearable (I think it isn't) for some "first world" countries, Facebook is a global social network, for the vast majority of the world it is way too much, Facebook doesn't provide enough value to justify it. If the network becomes practically useless without a subscription (as in, almost nobody see your posts, you see only paid posts), most people will simply leave. Where will they go? I cannot say, even there is no good alternative, one will arise.
Everybody jumped on Face
Facebook following twitter? (Score:2)
Meanwhile Twitter (Score:1)
Meanwhile over on Twitter, Elon is going to change it so only subscribers can use SMS 2FA, everyone else will have to use the app.
There is literally no fucking way I'm accepting a Twitter app on my phone. I don't trust any of these packs of chucklefucks that much, not Twitter, not Facebook, not any of 'em.
Mark wants all your data and money now. (Score:1)
Meta/FB should be paying users instead... (Score:2)
ransom / blackmain opportunity? (Score:2)
So now, me not having a FB account, I should be worried that scam account of my name would emerge, and it will be there publishing ansty stuff until I pay?
Great business model.
Re: ransom / blackmain opportunity? (Score:2)
lol (Score:2)
Nice social media feed you got there... (Score:2)
If paying meant no ads and no selling your info... (Score:2)
You know what? if a paid account would allow me to get rid of all those sponsored posts and ads and get them to stop trying to track and sell my data (because the $144 a year is worth FAR MORE to them then what they would get from selling that on me - maybe I'd consider it
I happily pay for the higher tier of Hulu to skip all ads people will pay more than you can make off advertising to them to skip the ads - sadly, these companies don't get that or they don't want it they want your subscription AND to sell
Wait... FB wants $12 a month from me... (Score:2)
Paying for Protection (Score:2)
Where have I heard that before?
"That's a real nice user profile ya got there. Be a shame if anything happened to it."
"Yeah, a real tragedy..."
There is a difference (Score:2)
If it came down to pay or go away....it will be "so long for all the fish"
Turns out, the people I know and want to keep in touch with all have this technology called
This ALL about falling revenue and desperation in trying to find a way to prop it up.
At maximum I would use facebook for 5 minutes a day just to see what friends/family are doing.
I have things
What a concept, actually charging for a service! (Score:2)
I joined Facebook back when it only allowed college students with .edu email addresses. (and my usage has declined steadily ever since.)
But I think that introducing the concept of charging users for social media as a service is actually a good thing for the health of the internet and society in general.
Anything tech platforms can do to reduce reliance on advertising revenue should make for a better product. Actually offering a customer service department!? What a concept.
So much of what made Facebook and In
Suck it Mark! (Score:1)
Meta's Incompetent Verification Free? (Score:2)
Paid both ways.... (Score:2)
Just as the banks can collect money from both the consumer who uses their credit card and the merchant who accepts it, Facebook will now be able to suck money in two directions. They collect your information and sell it to advertisers and God-knows-who-else. Then you pay them and verify that the information they are scraping from your Facebook page is valid. It's a great business model if anyone is stupid enough to pay them.
What service are they offering monthly? (Score:2)
They check if you are who you say you are at the start. How is that something that needs work as time goes on?
If it doesn't require work as time goes by, why am I paying you for it beyond initially?
Bad robot.
Advertising (Score:2)
We are witnessing the ... (Score:1)
... downfall and end of meta.
VALUE (Score:2)
"PRICE is what you pay. VALUE is what you get" - Warren Buffett (b. 1930)