Stupefy: Discord's influence - Container over content

Is Discord one of the most influential media company in the world? Think of Discord and you probably think of gamers, if you've even heard of it. Its influence, though, just broke way, way outside gaming. The gaming chat app's relentless focus on user privacy, commitment to content and its creators, ability to foster social ties and willingness to embrace non-advertising revenue models may have predicted the wider shift toward private group messaging to which Mark Zuckerberg has recently been converted. If Facebook shifts to act more like Discord, what does it mean for what we watch, who we share it with and how media companies make and spend money? The first thing to know about Discord, and one way Facebook is copying it, is that Discord is the rare company that respects its community, selling to gamers rather than selling gamers' data to advertisers. Of course, the nature of the community itself - gamers - demands it. They're extremely cynical, vocal, and fickle. Gamers may never have adopted the chat app in the first place if Discord had not set out from the very beginning to protect its users' data and would likely jump to another platform the second that changes.

The community now numbers 250 million registered users. Discord founder Jason Citron has rejected ad dollars from day one. He's been very vocal about instilling and maintaining trust with the community. Here's Citron on the differences between Facebook and Discord: "Their whole business model, frankly, I think makes it difficult for them to kind of get out of [their privacy challenges]. Whereas like for Discord, we’re the complete opposite, right? The business model that we’re launching aligns with our customers. We’re selling you something and it’s all about delivering value to you that you pay us for...Our whole approach on privacy is the complete opposite. It’s invite only. We don’t scan your messages."Now, of course, Facebook is shifting toward "a privacy-focussed vision" emphasizing group messaging. Zuckerberg calls the future of the Internet "the digital equivalent of the living room." In his blog post announcing the shift, he wrote: "As I think about the future of the internet, I believe a privacy-focused communications platform will become even more important than today's open platforms.

Privacy gives people the freedom to be themselves and connect more naturally, which is why we build social networks."If Facebook, Instagram, Messenger and WhatsApp start to look more like it, the second most important thing to know about Discord is its revenue model and what that means. Discord rejects ad dollars. Until recently, it had simply been the place where gamers communicate while gaming. But with pressure mounting not only from the de facto games store and games launcher Steam but also from Epic, Google and Apple, Discord last month outlined a plan to let developers sell directly to its community. This reflects a much broader shift toward communities. Discord is a social layer on top of all games, and it's those connections - who we talk to, what we talk about, what we watch and play - that may become the key to where money is spent in the future. Just look at Facebook's private messaging obsession and the enormous implications it has for users and media companies. According to Casey Newton, the shift toward private messaging means Facebook needs a new business model. The Newsfeed, the source of advertising dollars, is already on the way out.

The focus for revenue at Facebook and Instagram will be commerce. Newton says "commerce and payments are all the rage inside Facebook now." And Zuckerberg explains the plan to embrace commerce this way: "Focus on the most fundamental and private use case -- messaging -- make it as secure as possible, and then build more ways for people to interact on top of that, including calls, video chats, groups, stories, businesses, payments, commerce, and ultimately a platform for many other kinds of private services." Group chats are the present and the future. If you want to see how powerful these small friend groups can be, subscribe to a Patreon-only podcast that gives you access to a private Discord server where all the other patrons of the podcast can share media and chat about things important to each other. People in these rooms are self-selected. They care about the same niche things. They will most likely take a recommendation on a product or service much more seriously from each other. Obviously Zuckerberg knows this now. Who knows if Facebook will follow through on this shift, though.

Container over content

Is there a worse sign for the future of what we spend our time watching than this? Last week, a new survey from MoffettNathanson confirmed something I've been noticing for a while now: we care less now about the quality of content than we do the way we get it. I've written before that Netflix is a time company. Currently, Netflix claims 10% of TV time in the US. But the company is determined to extract more minutes of each day from the subscribers it already has around the world. That's why you see such a relentless focus on improving the product and such monumental investments in more and more content. Skip credits. Autoplay next episode. Autoplay previews. These features reflect the company's obsession with engagement. It's designed to keep you watching, no matter what. Whether the content is good or bad, we continue watching because that's what the product is designed to measure and drive. It's not unlike how Spotify's algorithms drive tons of listening hours to non-specific muzak meant for moods and "context" rather than driving listening to songs and albums with a face behind them. We like streaming itself more than we like music or prestige drama.

We like the container and don't really care what goes in it. And now we have proof. From Recode's Peter Kafka and Rani Molla: "Asked to rank reasons they like Netflix, Nathanson’s respondents ranked Netflix shows (and movies) after reasons like 'not being interrupted by ads' and 'I can binge watch.' In other words, Netflix users like the container even more than the content." Another reason not mentioned by Kafka and Molla that respondents ranked above the shows and movies on Netflix is that they "can choose what to watch." We really just want content when we want it, how we want it. How good, or how thought-provoking, the content is can be besides the point. Making us feel comfortable takes precedence over pushing us out of our comfort zone. And now with competition from Disney, Amazon and AT&T (new owner of HBO) for streaming minutes, will those companies have the same incentives as Netflix when it comes to creating their products? Probably. There will be a race to improve the product experience to promote engagement, and the types and quality of content will most likely follow. I am not pretending like TV was always genius. A lot of it was safe zone content.

But we did have the Sopranos.

Bob Greenblatt, new CEO of WarnerMedia and de facto head of HBO: "We’re looking at trying to get something significant out to the consumer every several weeks to a month." (Vulture)

The weekend K-Pop broke: "Korean pop artists are posting a banner week in their forge into the U.S. mainstream, with BTS breaking a YouTube record and performing on “SNL” and Blackpink scoring a first with its Coachella performance." (Variety)

Wow: "'Avengers: Endgame' doesn't come out for two weeks. It is still #1 at this weekend's box office, with 33% more share than the actual #1 (Shazam!)

" (Twitter)

Trump: "The race to 5G... is a race we will win.” (NYT)

Scott Rogowsky left HQ for sports app DAZN. (TechCrunch)

Wild story: "Osama bin Laden sent people round our house and told us to stop playing Portishead on a Friday afternoon." (Twitter)