Hacker News Reader

Comment by anilshanbhag | Hacker News Reader

Lost in all this is an important distinction that Snapchat wanted to make: they wanted to separate friends from influencers / celebrities / media. It was a good change. Another important thing Snapchat does is it doesn't show likes / followers publicly - when the whole world is chasing these numbers Snapchat has taken stance against it. The general philosophy they follow makes me think this is short term pain and the company will do fine in the long run.

View on HN

It was a terrible change. People (most heavily: kids) like to consider celebrities their friends. People loved the close, barely filtered connection Snapchat gave them.

I'd love to hear why you think that separating friends from influencers, celebrity, or media is a good change. The last element I get somewhat, but I don't think anyone has a conceptual issue identifying who is a fried and who is an influencer, and being able to see stories with minimal friction was a major draw for me.

I follow few friends and non-friends on FB and they are very distinct entities. The non-friends I follow are because of some common interest like a research field or outdoor sport. I would be happy to see weekend yard work photos from my friend but I wouldn’t care so much of that from non-friends. The intent of why I follow these two classes is very different. However Snapchat crowd might be different as I understand. Young folks would tend to consider both classes as same.

Why did Snapchat feel so strongly that it was necessary to separate them? Neither Instagram nor Twitter separate friends from influencers/celebrities/media, and that seems to work fine.

My understanding is that it was a philosophical standpoint Evan took, not 'Snapchat' as a whole necessarily.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com