I happened to be reading a review of the Social Network today. It has struck me that virtually every article or review about this film has mentioned the fact that it narrates the creation of the “revolutionary” social networking site, and demonstrates how Facebook has “changed life as we know it”, etc., etc. Basically, all the reviews say that Facebook was a ground-breaking, radical innovation that has single-handedly (or “single-sitedly”) changed our lives.
But wait…didn’t Facebook only become popular AFTER MySpace?
The way I remember it, MySpace was a huge, wildly popular success, and Facebook was (at least in the beginning) an also-ran. I’d heard of it, but didn’t use it because who needs TWO social networking sites? Eventually, I discarded my MySpace page and switched over to FB for several reasons -
- MySpace was too heavily geared towards college kids, and FB seemed more like an ‘all-ages’ networking site (and as a result, I felt less like a creepy chicken-hawk going on it.)
- I had grown exasperated by the amount of obvious spam ‘friend requests’ I was receiving - No Brianna, Krystle, Kelli, Tiffani, Alexis and Amber, I do NOT want to be friends or see your “more revealing shots” on your other web page.
- MySpace was owned by Rupert Murdock’s News Corp. - and I would generally like to have as little association with the purveyors of Fox News as possble.
Ironically, two of those three reasons of course are problems I have with Facebook. But anyway, my point is…why is Facebook getting all the accolades for being such a ground-breaking, revolutionary, paradigm-shifting phenomenon and MySpace is seemingly forgotten?