Given some social media pundits’ “premature speculation” of calling things dead, I’m surprised no one started sounding the “Facebook is dead!” knells after we learned that StumbleUpon surpassed Facebook as the top source of social media traffic. (Also see this post on ReadWriteWeb.)
Sure, no one believes Facebook is suffering, because 1) we’re only talking about social media traffic, 2) there are still questions about the methodology, and 3) Facebook is f—ing huge.
But after hearing that Facebook was going to kill Google, that Twitter was going to kill email, or that social media is going to make corporate websites irrelevant, I’ve decided that people who declare things dead are only doing it to get attention (this post’s headline notwithstanding).
Is Facebook going to die, just because it got surpassed in one small category? Hardly. Yet, I heard someone declare “nobody Googles” because Facebook had just surpassed Google in number of minutes on site, by a total of 2 million minutes, based on worldwide usage. But Facebook and Google do two different things. Besides, being a 799-pound gorilla doesn’t make you irrelevant.
Is Twitter going to kill blogging? Never. Because if you can sum up your deepest thoughts about life, the universe, and everything in 140 characters, you’ve got all the emotional depth of a high school prom.
Is email dead just because some jegging-wearing hipster carrying a 60-year-old camera would rather send a text on her smartphone? Hell no. How else is Facebook and Twitter going to notify her that she’s got new friends and followers?
I truly am surprised that no one tried to declare Facebook dead after the StumbleUpon news last month. I figured every Wrongway Feldman-praying Internet pundit would have been all over that news, declaring that the days of social media were at an end, and that we were all going back to rotary phones and typewriters.
Or maybe that’s finally dead.
Photo credit: rodolpho.reis (Flickr)
