Every website is there for an official reason. For example, people use Facebook to keep in touch with friends. Linkedin is there so professionals keep in touch with colleagues. Twitter is there so you can send short messages about what is happening around you. However, websites also have an unofficial reason to exist and my opinion is that this unofficial reason is the real thing that makes the website work. Let’s take a look at some of the most popular social networking websites so I can talk more about my view.

Facebook: voyeurism (and exhibitionism)

The real reason why Facebook works is that people can become voyeurs in a legit way. Most of the time, people spend their time on Facebook by clicking around their friends’ friends profiles. People look at pictures, bios and so on. Of course, people chat and comment on each others pictures and videos, but what is really happening on Facebook is that you can get into someone’s life without braking any privacy law. Basically, this means that every Facebook user implicitly agrees to be the subject of voyeurism. It’s like their is a deal among Facebook users that they can all invade each other’s privacy.

Twitter: spamming (a.k.a marketing)

When someone tweets something, it’s supposed to be about what’s happening because that’s what is written on top of the text box where people write their tweets. But when I read 90% of tweets, I get the impression that product sales, promotions and money making schemes are all that is happening around the world. Well, that’s because doing marketing is Twitter’s unofficial function. More precisely, Twitter is a very effective tool for viral marketing because of it’s retweet feature. Every time something is tweeted, a whole bunch of people will see it for a short period. Every time something is retweeted, more people will see it. So the idea with Twitter is that 1) you need to have a lot of followers and 2) you need to have a retweet ring so you can actually not waste your time using Twitter.

Linkedin: spying on competition(a.k.a. benchmarking )

No, Linkedin won’t get you a job especially if you have a lot of connections. Why? because those people you are connected to don’t know you. Why do they add you to their network if they don’t know you and that you will probably never be useful to each other? That’s because they wanna get the biggest possible network to see what is happening on the market. This make spying the unofficial function of Linkedin. Just like Facebook where everybody agrees to be an exhibitionist, Linkedin users agree to give away information about their company. Incidentally, it becomes very useful for professionals who want to find a good fit for their talent.

Digg: brainwashing

Ok, a nicer way would be that it’s a bookmark sharing social network. But in reality, it’s a place to brainwash people because popular links produce group effects and simply get more attention than links that are at the bottom. If a lot of people digg a page, it must be because it’s cool, right? Well, not really. Taking a closer look at the top links on Digg, you’ll see that they are all submitted by a small click of around 500 diggers. Basically, if you are not one of those guys, your links will never make it to the first page. This means that it isn’t cool pages that are on Digg’s top page, but the pages that are submitted by those guys. As a result, everybody is under the influence of those top digger’s taste which makes brainwashing the unofficial function of Digg.

Mashable: advertising for startups

Yeah I know. Mashable is supposed to be about social media news. But which news? It makes me laugh every time I read one of those posts with a list of ten useful/hot social networks. In those ten websites, there is always one of them that is not hot nor useful. I wonder what one it is doing in that list among 9 other cool sites? Somebody being paid to put it the list? I guess so. This is exactly why the FTC is going to fine bloggers who don’t disclose payments. This makes Mashable very similar to Digg, only they don’t give anyone the illusion of interaction: “you are being fed by what we talk about” says Pete Cashmore.