'Anti-Facebook' MeWe Social Network Adds 2.5 Million New Members In One Week
- Reference: 0141277060
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/21/01/19/230242/anti-facebook-mewe-social-network-adds-25-million-new-members-in-one-week
- Source link:
> Since launching in 2016, it surged to nine million users in October 2020, doubling its membership during each of the last three years. The platform is currently sitting at 15.5 million members -- 50% of whom are outside of North America. MeWe is now translated into 20 languages and is currently the No. 1 social app in Hong Kong. The company says that its membership spikes frequently -- as people worldwide seek a social network that respects them as customers to be delighted, not with "data to share, target, or sell."
>
> MeWe claims to be the new mainstream social network with the features people love and no ads, no targeting, and no newsfeed manipulation. MeWe is the most downloaded social app and No. 3 in the list of most downloaded apps as of Jan. 15, 2021. It was knocked off the top slot by WhatsApp alternatives Signal and Telegram, which are benefitting from the brouhaha over WhatsApp's data privacy changes.
[1] http://www.mewe.com/
[2] https://www.zdnet.com/article/mewe-the-anti-facebook-social-network-adds-2-5-million-new-members-in-1-week/
To put this into perspective (Score:3)
FB has 2.7 billion users. So they've got about .5% (half of percent) of FB's users. Still, more power to them. And with the current level of scrutiny Facebook (probably) can't just buy them up.
Re: (Score:3)
Facebook likes to tout that 2.7B number, but what they don't tell us is how many of those users have been active at any time the past week? Month? Year? How many of them are even confirmed to be actual people and not bots or organizations?
They might not be hemorrhaging users but their active base isn't likely as large as their advertisers believe it to be.
Re: (Score:3)
So basically, many users were baptized into FBholicism, but are now lapsed FBholics, but the FBholic church still counts them towards its membership.
I thought of that (Score:2)
and didn't mention it because I'm pretty sure every social network does that. And, well, that includes MeWe too.
Re: (Score:2)
> And with the current level of scrutiny Facebook (probably) can't just buy them up
Unless the States and the Government start nutting up, they absolutely can. And while there is a lot of bluster to go after Google and Facebook and what-not. And hell's bells, Google is actually being brought into court.. Might I still remind everyone that Microsoft "WAS" an actual monopoly and we see how amazing the Government's "going after them" was then. So yeah, I'll buy that scrutiny line once I see some actual scrutiny happen and not this milquetoast "mother may I have some more money for re-elec
Perhaps the market works (Score:2)
If enough people displeased by the inordinate power just a few social media sites are presently wielding, the best option is often voting with your feet and your wallet.
Leave in droves... expedite the diversity of power. If we can't remove the power from the corporations, let's at least water it down.
Re: (Score:2)
> If enough people displeased by the inordinate power just a few social media sites are presently wielding, the best option is often voting with your feet and your wallet.
> Leave in droves... expedite the diversity of power. If we can't remove the power from the corporations, let's at least water it down.
That's the same thing I keep saying about Amazon and all I hear are excuses why it won't happen. Same here. Someone will give an excuse why people can't leave FB while simultaneously complaining the company has too much power.
Re: (Score:2)
> Leave in droves
So that way these companies know who to buy out next.
Yeah voting with your wallet isn't really a fight to be won here. These companies have more in their couch cushions than at least half of America has had in their wallet their entire lifetime. I mean you can draw the battle line on wallets, but they'll win every time.
social network of the week (Score:2)
Expect more of this as they flock between platforms and the platforms collapse in one way or another. I'm guessing that, once the dust settles on this episode of history, most will go back to Facebook as the devil they know. After all, these are the people for whom "the internet" _IS_ Facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
Their user base never stops giving amusement. [1]https://www.newsweek.com/white... [newsweek.com]
You can't make this shit up.
[1] https://www.newsweek.com/white-supremacist-bryan-betancur-gps-proud-boys-1562364
Twtxt? (Score:1)
MeWe sounds exactly like what Twtxt is _trying_ to be. Coincidence? Difference; I _probably_ do want to start a not-for-profit company around Twtxt.
Better than Imzy! (Score:1)
Imzy tried to be better than Reddit. Their heavy handed and one sided censorship was really bad for the site. If you didn't fall into one of their preferred groups, there was nothing for you.
I just signed up for WeMe (based on this slashdot post) and it's 'ok' so far.
I want to a group about roses. Just lots of people spamming photos they took from elsewhere on the web. Zero content.
Then I applied for a few other groups. The one private group that let me in so far seems to be pretty good with decent dis
Re: Better than Imzy! (Score:1)
I don't know what their guidelines are, but due to the high number of 'naturism' groups, I'm guessing that porn is not allowed, but nudity is.
Obviously there is more to a diverse content base than boobs, but it seems that is how they are working the pornography angle.
I spent a good hour on the site and I'm...not impressed so far. All of the discussions I am interested in protected, and I need to have my applications approved. The ones I got into quickly, are poor collections of memes.
I'm glad they have a
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly. I've been on MeWe about a year specifically to get away from biased censorship. I will auto-leave anyplace that falls into the same trap. Also it isn't a 'replacement' until it has enough people. On FB there were about 200 people I talked to regularly. On MeWe there's 4. I'm hanging on, hoping enough people get sick of FB's crap, but *shrug*. I'd rather to talk to no one without censors than everyone with when it comes down to it.
It has Fingerprinting ... (Score:4, Informative)
I have an extension that alerts me to fingerprinting and the extension provides fake values.
So, while there's no "targeting," there's actual targeting.
Chinese developer? (Score:2)
If it is then no thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
It says they're owned by [1]Sgrouples Inc. [bloomberg.com] whose site is just a redirect to MeWe.com.
[2]This article lists a bunch of funding sources, the company is still private. [marketrealist.com]
The business section of their wikipedia article says:
> Business
> In 1998, entrepreneur Mark Weinstein established SuperGroups.com, a social media website. The site was closed by its largest investor in 2001.[22] Gathering largely the same leadership team, Weinstein incorporated Sgrouples Inc. in 2011.[2][22][23] MeWe was incorporated as a subsidiary of Sgrouples,[23] and based in Culver City, California.[10] Over the next six years, Sgrouples raised about $10 million from investors including lynda.com founder Lynda Weinman, fashion designer Rachel Roy, and authors Jack Canfield and Marci Shimoff.[8][10]
> MeWe finished its initial financing round in July 2018 by raising $5.2 million in new funds.[8][10] The company began work on upgrading MeWe and initiating work on an enterprise version called MeWePRO.[8]
> MeWe emphasizes its commitment to privacy and remaining ad-free.[2][10] MeWe has said they will never use cookies or spyware to generate content about users, and that it will not track user activity in any way or sell user data to a third party.[7][8] MeWe has described itself as the "anti-Facebook" due to its focus on data privacy, lack of moderation, and simple newsfeed algorithm.[5]
> The MeWe business model does not rely on advertising revenue; rather, MeWe generates revenue from subscription fees and by selling custom emoji.[8][9][24] In December 2019, MeWe announced it would be introducing a premium tier and a separate two-tiered enterprise tier includes voice and video conferencing, as well as integrations with Office 365.[8][24][25]
> Mark Weinstein is the founder and chief executive officer of MeWe.[26] Advisors to MeWe include computer scientist Tim Berners-Lee and filmmaker Cullen Hoback.[27][28]
> So, at least on the surface, it doesn't seem so, but being private means they don't have to disclose much.
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/profile/company/1055422D:US
[2] https://marketrealist.com/p/how-to-invest-in-mewe/
Orwell we could do better... (Score:1)
4 legs good, 2 legs better
Already claimed by Hannity and co (Score:1)
Interesting to see how this network got claimed. Sure, youâ(TM)re data apparently isnâ(TM)t sold. But the social dynamics are toxic with âopinionsâ(TM) and paranoia for leftist âinfiltratorsâ(TM). Hannity and more of those types hawking books and posting a steady stream of Foxy content
Adding to their addiction (Score:2)
I doubt many of these people are quitting Facebook. Seems like they're just adding to their social media addiction. Possible a land grab for usernames.
Just means fakebook will have them canceled (Score:1)
Fakebook, will call whomever their network provider, server farm is, and have them pulled.
The best social media is ... (Score:2)
It doesn't matter which school you are in, or which class you attend, what clubs you join or which sports you take part in - at the end of it all do the pretty girls get all the attention. Therefore the best social media is the one with the prettiest girls on it.
Since people are going to ask (Score:4, Informative)
They think they can generate sufficient revenue from subscriptions and custom emoji.
Re: (Score:1)
And if that fails they may have to come up with better ways to monetize the business while continuing to not sell users data... I hope they continue to grow their user base.
Re: (Score:3)
What's to stop them changing their terms of service and starting to sell data? Checking on their site they seem to be a norma US company, not something like "public interest company". Looks so hopeful, but burnt so many times.
Re: (Score:3)
> And if that fails they may have to come up with better ways to monetize the business while continuing to not sell users data
Narrator: They don't.
I mean seriously you all! People want to do away with Facebook, but not solve any actual problems that make Facebook, Facebook. I mean seriously, what does anyone think is going to happen? Hmmmm? Not only the underlying issues of "gee, how do I sustain an economic stream" but also the big players have a mountain of capital and a multitude of lines of credit at their command. So yeah, Twitter the website takes a hit, but Twitter the company just buys someone else and rebrands. It's
Re: (Score:2)
> mean, at least now we get month to month contracts instead of year long contracts, so I guess that's a win. But in terms of major upsets, yeah, no, it didn't happen and it ain't going to happen. Why? Because NBC is now Comcast and ABC is now Disney and so on.
Uh, what?
Streaming has brought us:
1. A large crop of independent companies not associated with the major movie studios, the most well known being Netflix, but a sizable number of smaller companies from resellers of syndicated content to opera cha
Re: (Score:2)
The bookface has over 2e9 active users. I'd gladly pay $1/year, or $10 lifetime (they can live off the usury) for something which doesn't make me the product. With scale, they don't need to charge much. I did the #deletefacebook thing 7-8 years ago, and don't miss it.
Re: (Score:3)
FB averages approx $8/user/year in revenue. Still a very reasonable sum for a privacy preserving service - for those in the first world. To maintain that average over the billion plus users who cannot provide that, first world users might need to spend $5/month. Still, not super-outrageous
.
Re: (Score:2)
While delivering targeted ads and selling your data brings in more money than it costs for Facebook, it does cost money, so if another network doesn't do those things, it can operate with lower costs.
Re: (Score:2)
It has nothing to do with costs. FB is clearing like $30billion in profit a year. It's just a lot to give up for the owners of the company.
Re: (Score:2)
That $8 figure is determined not by how much the website costs to run, but how much advertisers are willing to pay.
If MeWe doesn't concern themselves with buying up every competitor, adjacent product, VR headset manufacturer, dildo factory... If they just want to run the website and earn a comfortable living from it, they wouldn't need to charge anywhere near that.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that's very true. However, it seems they'll need to promise enough ROI to continue gathering investment.
Re: (Score:1)
The market valuation of Facebook is US$226 per user. So, $10 is just not going to cut it.
Could you get a billion people to pay $200 for something they can get for "free" now? ("free" = I am the product)
[1]https://www.thetypefacegroup.c... [thetypefacegroup.co.uk]
[1] https://www.thetypefacegroup.co.uk/social-network-value-per-user/
Re: (Score:2)
The market valuation of Facebook is probably based on the expectation that Facebook will be able to buy the next big thing early, because I don't see how their current business could ever be worth that much.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, they are doomed