Last month, on the eve of its 10th anniversary, Facebook released a new mobile-dedicated application: Facebook Paper. Only available on iOS in United States for now, this is another foray for the blue giant into a dedicated environment experience that challenges an established player (in this case, Flipboard). For those who do not know Paper, it is a redesign of the Facebook interface with articles on various topics (news, sports, photography, etc.) that are not associated with your Facebook news feeds.
This is not the first time that Facebook has placed itself between mobile users and a popular third-party application. First there was Facebook Poke which aimed to replace Snapchat. Facebook Camera was a direct challenge to Instagram, before Facebook threw in the towel and simply bought them. Then there is Facebook Messenger that looks to replace SMS and email, and with their acquisition of WhatsApp we are sure to see Facebook take a larger stake in the SMS market. Lastly, there was the ill-fated Facebook Home which was a challenge to other mobile phone interfaces and operation systems.
Facebook and the yogurt industry
However, Paper is not just an attack against an established app. It is a new way of presenting your Facebook News Feed. Facebook is banking on the same marketing strategy as the yogurt industry. You don’t just try to convince everyone to eat one yogurt; you diversify your product into many variations to accommodate almost everyone. In other words, Facebook is likely to create several different apps and several unique Facebook feed interfaces that allow users to choose the one that suits them best. This is one of the strategies that Facebook has found to try to counter the desertion of users.
A mobile-first experience
Compared to the classic Facebook app, the Paper experience is a good example of a mobile-first experience. The standard Facebook application is an adaptation of the experience that lives on the desktop but despite numerous efforts it gives the impression of being clumsy and ill-fitted for such a small screen. If you were to give the classic Facebook app a novice user they may find a great amount of difficult compared to using the desktop version. The reality is that the amount of content is suitable on a computer screen but is very heavy for a mobile experience. Ironically, Facebook app users want the full experience with all the features on mobile but this requires a lot of resources that makes it difficult to achieve a seamlessly mobile-friendly experience.
Paper is also better suited to the reality of dedicated mobile use apps and the necessity for accelerated consultation and rapid response. The navigation interface is also reminiscent of Blackberry OS 10, based largely on easy to remember swipe movements. Moreover, according to a study from usertesting.com, 74 out of 105 respondents preferred the Paper experience rather than the classic Facebook app experience. Moreover, when it came time to perform a series of tasks on Facebook Paper, testers were able to accomplish the tasks with ease.
Several other Facebook features remain, but we note, for example, that the ability to create content from scratch is secondary. It is easy to share, comment, like, and consult notifications and messages, but you have to search a bit in order to create a new post – don’t even try to create a poll!
Paper also fits well into the reality of social media. Posts with images and videos are the most interesting, the most read, and the most commented publication form. Facebook was developed at a time where text posts were the norm. Facebook has adapted, but has remained an interface that is mainly based on text content. Paper corrects the situation by being an application based on images and videos instead.
For now there is no advertising, but this is probably temporary. It is possible that the content providers pay to be news sources but this is unlikely. There is a good chance that sponsored feeds will make their appearance if the app is successful.
There is also an enriched Facebook experience with the introduction of new sections of content: Headlines which corresponds to the news, Score corresponding to sports news, Exposure for photos, and so on. However, these news feeds remain complementary to the Facebook experience and despite its relatively strong presence in the Paper experience, its importance remains relatively minimal. The inability to really personalize items to user interests and the fact that the interface is less well thought out demonstrates the low valuation of these sections. It is certainly an added value, at best it allows a quick overview of a variety of topics of interest and gives users the possibility to share them on Facebook.
What we like, from the interface point of view
The guided tutorial: Users are first presented with a small introduction and then presto, you have access to the app. But while testing the app, a voice and a banner magically appeared at the right time to explain how to use each feature. Once a feature were properly explained and tested a brief text explanation appeared.
The absence of any navigation: No arrows, no buttons. Everything is done by swiping, which after a slight learning curve becomes quite natural. A variety of animation effects emphasis the naturalness of the swipes. This may sound easy and natural upon review but it was probably a very complicated feature to develop and test.
What we like least
Loss of control over the main image: You see an interesting picture appear in the main section, but another appears before you have time to click on it. Too late. If you drag the new image to the left, which would be the logical behaviour, you go to another section instead of restoring the previous image.
No customization of news: To paraphrase the label on my cap, “one news fits all”. You decide which sections you want to have but not the sources for these sections. And sections are very limited, only fifteen are available at this time. It is possible that there will be more choices and more depth in the future, but for now it is rather vague. It is also possible that the omission of control is a way to distinguish themselves from Flipboard and simplify experience. We must not forget that the “other” sections are secondary in the Paper experience despite what Facebook would say about it.
The lack of temporal markers: In the bottom section there is no way to differentiate the news of the day,yesterday or last week. Chronologically speaking, all news has the same value, which is a mistake.
Divergence in Facebook groups icons: Icons associated with a Facebook group are not the same as the ones on the classic Facebook application or web experience. This is a dissociation compared to the web experience.
So, should you install it?
If you are an interface expert or developer you could possibly get access to the app. Otherwise, it is difficult for a non-American to install the app. If you absolutely must, The Next Web explains a way to do it that involves the creation of a US iTunes account. We recommend to just wait it out. The interface for the Facebook section is certainly very interesting, but all other sections focus on US news. Despite my strong interest in other sports, The Score section talks more about football, basketball and baseball than hockey. the Headlines section picks articles from the Washington Post, NY Times and Politico, which can be interesting if you are fan of US news and politics but not if you want to be aware of what is happening north of the 49th parallel – less Obama and the NBA, more Justin Bieber and NHL would be greatly appreciated!
If the app obtains the expected success in the United States, there would be the chance for Paper to be exported to other countries with extra regionally specific content sections. Otherwise, it is quite possible that there would be no international career for this application, which would be a shame.
The post Facebook Paper and the Yogurt Industry appeared first on iProspect Blog.
