I am worried about how the Internet defines social.
There is a big difference between shopping online and shopping in seventy-degree weather, when someone brushes your bag, and you run into your friend on his way to a soccer game. Online shopping is solitary; real-life shopping is social. Seeing that my friend “liked” a new laundry solution on Facebook is not a social experience.
I rarely shop alone. Even on utilitarian trips to the grocery or Target, even if I don’t have an accomplice, I am still out and among other people. I want my best friend to tell me what to wear and that the very short shorts look good on me and encourage me to buy a pair when I would never do so otherwise. I want Ryan to tell me that the color of the bike I’ve chosen is great and for the bike salesperson to tell me that the particular model I’ve picked out is hot across the country and is almost sold out. I want energy. I want exchange. I want life.
This simply doesn’t happen online at the moment. There is no thrill of interacting with another human being. The experience is stale, stagnant and one-sided. It is the worst of consumerism.
I am worried that online commerce is mistaking data for social. When you use my interest graph to connect me with the exact person in California who has the vintage wine I desire, that is not social. My interest graph is not social. My reputation is not social. My identity is not social. These are important as currencies on the web, but only as currencies of social relationships. They are not the social relationships themselves. They don’t form the experience of shopping. Too many sites nowadays are defining social commerce as a like, a share, a review. That is not social. That is data.
Data is good for the company, not the user. Data is good for targeting, personalization, and aggregation. Data is good for marketing, but it’s not social.
“Nothing beats targeted relevancy,” argues one online enthusiast. “And social serendipity will not beat targeted discovery.”
That is so sad. Surely if the web has taught us anything, it’s how much, as a race, we humans love to go off on tangents? To be distracted? I certainly don’t go on Twitter and Facebook to be efficient.
Most people don’t know what they want anyway. I can type in my interests and style preferences until my fingers go bare bone, but what I really want is the summer dress my girlfriend wears out on a Thursday night. She looks so good!
As sites increasingly recommend only what they think you want, you lose out on the spontaneity and delight of finding something new and different. Anyone who has used Pandora realizes this is the service’s strength and weakness. You discover new music initially, but eventually the site just plays the same things over and over.
Personalization isn’t just useful at times then, creepy at others, but also annoying. Only boring people hang out with people just like themselves and do the same things over and over and never step out of their bubble world.
The social aspect of shopping is in that real-time discovery, spontaneous input, and watching of people. The movement, the behaviors of another person. I can’t see that on the web. All of our normal cues are missing. So, we go ahead and rely on algorithms? That’s fancy, but there are easier solutions.
Let’s talk about Amazon’s new flash shopping site, MyHabit; it was just launched this week and it’s in the same vein as other private sales sites like HauteLook, Beyond the Rack, and Gilt. You might think Amazon is behind, but really, Amazon is always just a wee bit ahead of the curve, and man, do they get it right with this.
Okay, first, on those other sites, I can see the front of a shirt, the back of a shirt, I can hover and zoom or use my mouse. Pretty standard nowadays. On a slightly different site called JewelMint I can even watch a thirty-nine second video about a pair of earrings.
But here’s how Amazon, in a rather genius move, instantly differentiates the experience. In addition to upscale photography, the site features videos of the clothing on live models. So the moment you visit a product detail page, the model starts to move; she shifts, she turns, you see her back, and then she shifts and turns back around. I don’t have to hit play and the whole thing lasts about five seconds.
It’s non-intrusive and the user experience is really just brilliant. I can actually see how the model moves and how the clothes move on her. I have a one hundred percent better experience in judging and assessing the piece of clothing that a photograph can never give me. And that is social.
You may be thinking no, that’s UX. You may be thinking you’re not interacting with the model – and certainly I am not talking to her – but really I am. I am watching her just as if she were on the street and seeing how the clothes move and look on her. It is live and it is a humanizing online shopping experience.
This is only the beginning of how user interfaces and experiences, not data will redefine online commerce. I would love to see an interface that allows me to see what strangers and my friends are browsing in real-time. I’d really love to invite my best friend in Madison to go on a shopping date while I’m in DC and browse a site simultaneously while I glance at her and what she’s browsing.
If you try to imagine these experiences in the web’s current architecture, it seems clunky, unrealistic even, but I assure you, the interfaces that use the data of web 2.0 will evolve and become increasingly important in web 3.0. And that’s what will define social on the Internet.
So everyone else is busy prophesying that while “the first phase of e-commerce was the utilitarian hunt for staples, the next phase of e-commerce will be about recreational shopping where the merger of social and interest graphs will drive buying decisions,” but here’s my prediction: it’s not going to be about data. Data is useless without a meaningful experience to plug into. How the interface and experience of social is formed will drive the next evolution of online commerce.
Just you wait.
13 replies on “What Comes After the Social Web?”
Ah! I’ve been saying this ALL THE TIME! It’s almost like you read my mind.
Although I agree that it’s much more social (and quite honestly fun) to go out shopping with friends and interact with real people, Zappos is my vice. I literally live next door to the mall and I often find myself shopping on Zappos for shoes that I could probably find and have, in my hands, in less than 15 minutes.
But, we’re busy people. On Zappos I can find a shoe, look at the pictures, and now look at the new video feature of the shoe (or bag) and get a much better idea of the product (this sounds similar to Amazon). I belong to the Zappos tribe, but you’re 110% right – that’s not social, it’s very singular, but that doesn’t mean I won’t keep doing it. It’s so easy… or maybe lazy :)
Ah, great minds :) I completely agree the convenience of online shopping is great (although I’m a Piperlime girl over Zappos :). That is the utilitarian factor that everyone talks about. But it’s not necessarily fun as it is a vice, as you mention. And I also don’t know that as much information as Zappos and all the other sites provide, if it’s better than the info you get in seeing that shoe in real life and discussing it with a friend. I think we’re just addicted to having as much information as possible rather than that information actually being useful. Anyway, the point being that when we try to enhance online experiences to be more social, I don’t think it’s going to be this data that does it, but rather the experience around the product. Will definitely be fascinating to see what’s next. Thanks for the comment!
I’m waiting for a site that takes my measurements and image and shows me how it will look on me, and how it fits, and please God, how it feels. Then I’ll quit going to the mall and trying on a dozen items and have none of them fit.
On the flip side, I like to go shopping and smile and say “Hello” to people and have them smile and say “Hello” back. Strangers. I also enjoy people watching, “what is she thinking, dressing like that in public?”, or telling someone their child is beautiful, or smart, or sweet–I leave it at that and don’t criticise out loud. Or wondering if that driver is drunk, on drugs or nuts. It’s an interactive experience in real time. Online is waiting for the confirmation, the shipping notice, the delivery notice and being disappointed again. Why do I keep trying?
I’ve also found I seem to spend more online for a look and pay to return than I would at the mall. I think all shopping experiences have a future for now, but I’ve learned to try online after I’ve exhausted the real time options, except when I get an email that says SALE or FREE SHIPPING. Then I know they’ve got me.
I’m completely with you on the “how it feels” aspect. Most of my time looking for clothing in stores is spent touching the fabric and the lining.
Although I’m addicted to feel, the emergence of sites like Rue La La and Gilt have simply made it so much more convenient for busy people to shop. The user experience, as Rebecca mentioned, has also become so much more sophisticated and personal. Most of these sites are also pretty connected via social media and it’s great to be able to get rather quick customer service from them by simply sending them a tweet with a question you have. Also, I’ve found it especially easy and hassle-free to be able to return a purchase that doesn’t work out – and inevitably this will happen at some point. I’m enjoying a balance of in-store and online shopping, but think that online shopping has become nearly so perfect to pass up.
Thanks for weighing in Ramou! You make an interesting point – I wonder if online experiences have met the bare minimum and won’t need to evolve that much more anymore. After all, how many tricks do we need? I do think that there’s this thing about being behind a screen though all the time. And the more we can make the screen non-existent, the better your shopping and other online experiences will be. And that’s where I see the interfaces and technology evolving. The screen is still very salient. I’d like to see our interactions with technology evolve beyond screens. Even in a screen-based culture now, we can do this with smart UX. Getting a bit technical now, but something to think about!
I think you described the serendipity and in the moment experiences of social well. I think what’s exciting about technology is that it has the ability not only to make our online experiences better, but also offline. Going to reply more in my comment to Ramou below…
I’ve had the best luck with MyShape.com for getting clothes that fit well. Trouble is, you have to update your measurements whenever they change, or no dice. :) And all the other hassles you describe. I love Amazon Prime for non-clothes purchases. They make it easy and cheap to buy and return, and have great selection. Neither, though, offers a truly social experience. And they are two different types of sites.
MyShape is more focused on discovery. Find things and brands you might not try otherwise, because the site knows they’ll fit you, without having to toggle the department store-botique spectrum/hassle.
Amazon is focused more on finding the best of what you already know you want, based on wish lists and items you’ve already bought.
I enjoy both of those benefits, but it’s still not like the social experience of walking thru Target on your way to buy a specific lipstick and noticing the lady next to you trying a different brand or shade… or picking up something on sale… which piques your curiosity about that product and influences your purchase. I don’t know that digital will ever fully capture that moment, the over-the-shoulder shopping experience, but to be honest, I don’t know if I want it to. There’s something awesome about the privacy of that experience that I love.
Great comments – I agree about that privacy aspect; it’s so nice to be able to just look at anything and figure it out for as long as you want. Whereas if I’m in a store, and I’m trying to figure out the best lipstick I feel kind of dumb if I’m there for longer than a few minutes. I think there are some categories of goods where the current web will suffice, but others where the web will need to evolve. Everyone is saying the next phase of social commerce is making it fun through increased social, but I think we have to realize that perhaps the goal is to make it more human, not more social. Darn, I should have put that in my post, ha!
It’s amazing how much we build things for the tools, and not the humans.
I got on a big rant about that yesterday concerning office furniture. We build the usability around the tools, and not the people who are going to use them. And it takes a toll on our bodies and health as a result.
I think this is an analog example around that. We build the experience around the tools, and around the business needs (need for data etc).
Oh, don’t even get me started on office design! I love the “we build the experience around the tools and business needs” – if we ever built the experience around the user, we might find some major innovations!
What about your work with Alice? Their success, etc. Just curious since it’s unique, but e-commerce and shopping ‘alone.’
It’s funny. Shopping is a really fun social experience for me with my girlfriends. However, I would say I choose to shop online (alone) because it’s efficient, I can get what I want faster and I don’t feel lonely or I don’t care that my friends aren’t around. I wonder if I will. And truly, the question after the fact, that’s something to ponder. But I don’t mind at all shopping alone, in fact, I often like it so I can get done what I need and not bore others with my household item shopping, etc. I will also say, I’m totally duped, the related items that I might like on Amazon (from books to clothes) I OFTEN buy because they really are things I need or would want.
What’s interesting about Alice is that consumer product goods are one of the most utilitarian category of goods, and yet it was one of the last to come online. Shoes we want to inspect and try on, but you don’t need to do that with a bottle of Tide.
Anyway, as I mentioned to Tiffany below, I think there are some categories of goods where the current web will suffice, but others where the web will need to evolve. Buying household goods as you mention is a chore, and really isn’t fun or social. But even with CPG, Alice solved a big issue of purchasing these recurring products by allowing people to save them on their personal shelf, which had never been done before and then was copied on our competitors’ sites. So even Alice, a company that is strongly based on data on the business side, is succeeding on the consumer side because of our user interface and experience. We made purchasing these goods more human online. And that’s what I think will define the social web in the future.
Well done, I think some of the best bloggers out there simply share their interesting lives offline. I do think social works in some applications- say Twitter conversation while experiencing the same event in real-time. However a Facebook like doesn’t start a conversation.