All too often when we report about a major acquisition or merger, there is a part of the story that is ignored: how the users respond to the news. Reactions usually run the gamut from expressions of congratulations, to expressions of fear, to expressions of rage. The case of Last.fm's purchase for $280 million by CBS is no exception.
Though the user reaction was mostly positive in this case, it was tempered with a wariness that the acquisition might lead to changes in the Last.fm service. From the Last.fm user forums, came this comment:
"Why do I have the feeling it's downhill all the way from now on :( Time to pull all my stats and find someone to write this kind of site again"
-mrhAWK
The complaints from those skeptical of the sale generally fell into two categories: those worried about privacy and those fearful that CBS would commercialize the site and stuff it full of DRM. On the privacy fears, Last.fm promised that their "approach to privacy won't change" as a result of being sold to CBS.
A common theme among those expressing doubts or anger about the sale was that CBS would turn a lovely independent site into a 24 hour commercial for CBS properties. From the forum again:
"Please don't let it happen. Please don't start pushing the CBS brand or signed artists or anything else 'corporate'. Please, just remain unbiased and agnostic."
-g675
The fears are, perhaps, not unfounded. When CBS launched CBS Records last year, their only other foray into music except radio, they said they planned to push music from the label's artists in CBS-produced television shows. And CBS CEO Les Moonves said Last.fm would be used to "to attract younger viewers and listeners across our businesses."
For some users, that kind of language brings to mind images of ads for CBS TV shows plastered all over the site and preferential treatment given to CBS Records artists. Luckily for Last.fm users, CBS Records only has four artists.
Then there were the users who were upset, but misinformed. "You cannot argue [that] CBS/Viacom is a good company when it is evident they do not appreciate free media (constant suits against Google/YouTube)," said one. Actually, CBS and Viacom are separate companies (though the same parent controls majority stakes in each), and CBS has a content partnership with YouTube.
So what can we learn from this? I found it interesting that the comments were far more positive on Last.fm's blog than on their forum. In the forum there was little presence from Last.fm staff (and even less from Last.fm's founders), whereas on their blog the comments immediately followed a post (obviously) in which Last.fm founder Richard Jones assured people that things would stay the same. Takeaway? Users have vivid imaginations, so keep them in the loop.
I think it's also important to respond to comments, both negative and positive, in a tactful and level headed manner. On the Last.fm blog, when one user expressed fears that CBS might push ads into the music streams on Last.fm's Internet radio service in order to squeeze more money out of the site, Richard Jones responded quickly: "Regarding the ads in the stream - we have no plans to do this." But on the forums, when a user predicted that Last.fm would turn into a marketing vehicle for CBS, a website employee responded sarcastically: "I'm glad you're familiar with such intimate details of our business plan in order to make your decision..." That comment wasn't well received by the poster of the original concern. Takeaway? Shouting matches with your users are never a good idea.
How do you think the sale of Last.fm to CBS will affect Last.fm's users?
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
"when we report about a major acquisition or merger, there is a part of the story that is ignored: how the users respond to the news."
Posted by: Andrew | May 31, 2007 7:56 PMIt seems particularly strange to ignore this, given that one of the questions asked about acquisitions of web firms is, "How much did they pay per user?"
Right. Users are often treated as a commodity, and because so many Web 2.0 sites are a function of their users (user generated content, user interaction, user data, etc.), how they respond to the deal (or any other major change) is an important consideration.
You should try never leave your users out in the cold.
Posted by: Josh Catone | May 31, 2007 8:24 PMYes and from a blogger pov, all too often we focus on the $$ of the acquisition - and not report on the user feedback. So something for us to remember :-)
Posted by: Richard MacManus | May 31, 2007 8:41 PMOf course things will change. The last.fm guys are naive if they think that they can promise that they won't. CBS didn't buy the company out of altruism - they bought it to enhance their ability to make money.
Can the founders of last.fm guide this process and inform CBS? Yeah, maybe, if the CBS higher ups will listen. But at the end of the day, CBS will look for opportunities to leverage last.fm and for last.fm to leverage other parts of CBS. If they don't do that they're not being good business people.
Posted by: rick gregory | May 31, 2007 10:20 PMYes, the users should not be taken for granted. But on the other hand, what do they expect? In the end, people behind sites like these are in it for the money. So whatever social site you use, when it gets popular, it's bound to be sold. Face it.
Posted by: frits | June 1, 2007 3:38 AMI'm certain that the founders of last.fm will stay true to their words. They always look after the users and wouldnt have taken this deal unless they were sure that the privacy of users would be unaffected.
Posted by: Dan W | June 1, 2007 3:49 AMI do not believe for a second that this acquisition will result in a more positive experience for the user. It is a shame to see this happen. I'm certain that a significant percentage of Last.fm's users are already looking for an alternative.
When I heard news of the acquisition for the first time "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced".
Posted by: physio | June 1, 2007 5:19 AM@rick gregory
I think the whole point of the acquistion was that both parties (CBS and last.fm) could benefit. Obviously CBS is going to benefit from the niche demographic of users last.fm attracts, and last.fm will gain the resources that come along with signing with a large corporation (e.g. CBS's ownership of a radio group, and of course $$$).
I'm sure (well I hope) that CBS understands that they can't just go in and try to leverage last.fm to their needs and expect longtime users like me to stick around. The last.fm community would fall apart and it would be a waste of $280 million on their part.
Posted by: Daryn Haynes | June 1, 2007 5:29 AMIsn't it ironic that the site name itself is "last FM"... does that imply that it's the last chance for you to get your stuff on the radio?
... *was* the last chance for you to get your stuff on the radio?
Posted by: Jimmy | June 1, 2007 6:51 AMI actually deleted my account shortly after learning of the sale to CBS. CBS is not Google and I do not wish to give CBS access to my collection of digital music by any current or future feature of the last.fm audio scrobbler. I am now exploring the benefits of other similar sites that are still independent of Main Stream Media ownership.
Posted by: Joe Tao | June 1, 2007 8:16 AMSad day for the Internet.
Well, there's always Shoutcast.com
Posted by: PJ at Ferodynamics | June 1, 2007 9:36 AMIt seems that a lot of people are negative of the CBS acquisition. I am not, since what is happening now is that the big media is going for "the long tail". My guess is that they have understood what it is about (they would not spend money just for fun), so for the opinion that Last.fm is going mainstream, think again. I don't think CBS would make that mistake, but I guess they could come up with a few others...
Posted by: Patrik Wallström | June 1, 2007 10:57 AMCertainly I'll be having a good hard look at the privacy agreement before scrobbling again. And admittedly, the list of music sites that sold out to big media is long on casualties and short on success stories (mp3.com springs most prominently to mind). But a better parallel might by the purchase of small indie labels - smarter companies buy them for the credibility and access to edgier artists or thinking. Let's hope CBS are taking that kind of an angle with Last.fm (though admittedly, there's too many sad cases of them being strip-mined)
Posted by: Michael Clarke | June 2, 2007 7:45 AMI think last.fm handled it well. The community has been important to the site since day one, I've asked many of my friends to join - and for that I feel like a 'valuable' part of the last.fm universe.
I'm sure that things won't change too much, especially now that MySpace has lost favour with a lot of people because of the ubiquitous ads and spamming. Last.fm have steered the ship for some six years against the current. I doubt they'll lose site of their goals just because they've been bought.
If the radio does go a bit sour, there will always be other excellent software like The Filter that will be able to create radio stations from the music I already own.
Posted by: Dot | June 4, 2007 2:12 AMDon't you guys remember when all us Americans made fun of the last.fm guys because they had no money but were still unwilling to put ads on the site? Remember when they would link their CDs to Amazon but wouldn't embed their Amazon Associates ID into the link because it was "tacky"? These guys have no intention of ruining their product, or even profiting off it. CBS wants a better pulse on GenX, whom they have largely lost, and GenY, whom they have completely lost. They'll play the Saturn/Scion game--lose money on last.fm in the name of research, and make it up with more targeted comedies on CBS TV. They'll probably copy what's good code from the niche market and roll out a stripped down version to AOL or the like. But they would be business idiots to change the bread and butter--the stats.
Posted by: Colin Jensen | June 6, 2007 7:44 AM