Following Gab's excellent post about must-read bloggers (which I feature on, making it no surprise I think it's excellent), I thought that it was about time that I added to my list of YOUmoz posts. And because I had said in a comment that the reason I hadn't posted recently was that I found it easier to do quick thought-pieces on the blog of the digital marketing agency I work for, I thought it might be worth doing a similar piece here.

The recent launch of Facebook's social ads system has generated enough comment to fill a library, but there are certain elements of it that have got me wondering whether we may look back on the launch as the point at which Facebook jumped the shark. In the spirit of openness I have to add that it was a Twitter from Hugh at Gapingvoid which first put me in mind of this phrase with regards to Facebook, but it is definitely too valid an idea not to share.

Many people said that the commercialisation of  MySpace would lead to its death, but Rupert Murdoch's acquisition of the site, and the way in which it has been managed since, have meant that these predictions have come to nothing. But something about the recent developments at Facebook makes me wonder whether Facebook will be as bulletproof.

Facebook's founder Mark Zuckerberg said that the introduction of the ad system was revolutionary, as it would lead to conversations between brands and consumers, a view also held by Andrew Walmsley of i-level, who wrote in Marketing magazine:

[Facebook] has found a distinctive way of creating a place for businesses to co-exist with people in a social network. It has established a means of promoting brands that's derived from people's interactions

But as Danny Sullivan said in an excellent article on Ad Age:

"Getting into" conversations. Yes, how we enjoy that. You're in a coffee shop talking with a friend, and suddenly along comes the spokesperson for an artificial sweetener, just wanting to have a chat. Go. Away. 

Why do I tend to agree with Danny rather than Mark & Andrew (as we're all having conversations, I'm sure that they won't mind me calling them by their first names)? Basically because I can no longer run polls.

You see, I was planning to send out some Facebook polls to gather some data that I was then going to use as linkbait for a client (the idea prompted by a chat I had at London SMX with Dan Caplin). But since the launch of the ad system, this is no longer an option. And when you consider that the minimum spend on polls was £25 whilst the ads require a spend in excess of £5000, you can see what that would have been seen as a good idea. But in a discussion about this with Jane "Fush & Chups" Copland (which admittedly took place on Facebook), she remarked;

how are Arizona State Uni boys going to advertise their fraternity parties now? I'm going to miss those "Jessie and Katie's krazee 21 run" flyers...

And there lies the whole point. Up until now, Facebook has very much felt like a site owned by its users. The introduction of the apps was fine, as they tended to be based around things that the users enjoyed (although I think it's only a matter of time until the phrase werewolf fatigue enters the dictionary). But these new developments suggest that Facebook will (understandably, in many ways) do whatever it takes to get the corporates on board.

And the main problem with this is that it seems to be leading to lazy marketing which has all the grace & style of the proverbial Uncle at the disco. Coke, one of the coolest & most iconic brands in the world, has a page on Facebook which feels like it was created by someone from the accounting department, which is probably why it only has 1,066 'fans'. And unless Facebook introduces a system that forces brands to think outside of their comfort zone and actually adds something to the users' experience, the only revolution it is likely to be part of is one where the citizens of Facebook rise up & move to the next big thing.