Referring to Fediverse services as "Alternatives" is bad marketing Discussion & Question Fediverse Ideas & Essay (piefed.social)
 

When trying to convince people to move to Fediverse services, people will often refer to them as "alternatives", calling Mastodon a Twitter-alternative, PeerTube a YouTube-alternative, etc. But I don't think this is the most effective approach.

This is a problem I noticed before I even heard of the Fediverse, because FOSS advocates do the same thing.

The issue is that to the average person, THING-alternative just means that if you already have THING, you don't need it. Or even worse, people will assume it's an inferior imitator. Most people aren't looking for "alternatives". When they adopt new social media it's in response to trends.

Look at mainstream social media for example. When TikTok appeared as a new video platform, it didn't call itself a "YouTube alternative".

So, at a minimum, I would advise not referring to services as "alternatives" but simply "cool new services/apps" and exalting their best features from a user perspective.

I have other thoughts on how to advertise the Fediverse, but I don't want to make this post too long.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

Common issue in bad marketing actually, for example you know those ads that compare one product to another? They usually boost awareness of the already better known product.

I think the issue in this case though is deeper, because the design of the platforms themselves are copying the incumbents instead of bringing new ideas to the forefront.

I think Digg realizes this, which is why they are not (at least for now) calling themselves a Reddit alternative in their revival.

  • source