For nearly a year, I put off joining Foursquare. It wasn’t due to privacy concerns or the usual “it’s a fad” reasons.
My reason was more about personal values. (Boy, that sounded preachy.) My concern about Foursquare is that it’s a pissing contest of conspicuous consumption. I have been on Foursquare for a while now, and my opinion is largely unchanged.
The problem with Foursquare is that most places that people check in require money. For privacy reasons, checking in at private residences is not very wise. Therefore, whether it’s the Mexican restaurant down the street, a cool bar downtown, Starbucks, the movie theater or your local grocery store, earning points and mayorships requires people to spend, spend, spend. Sure, there are free places to check in–one of my regular stops is a local dog park–but these are the exception more than the rule.
Foursquare rewards people who spend a lot of money on food and drink. I have friends who eat out 10 times per week, and I don’t begrudge them that. (Some people can afford thing that I can’t, I get it. Some people choose to spend on X, while I choose to spend on Y. I get it.) However, in a time when consumer debt is dangerously high, a medium that rewards such spending habits seems a bit backward.
Foursquare is the digital version of keeping up with the Joneses.
While this might sound like an inconsequential, self-righteous rant, it may present a real growth limit for Foursquare, especially in this economy. As we collectively lean back toward frugality and responsible spending, Foursquare pushes aside those who bring their lunch to work, choose Redbox over a $10 movie ticket and invite friends over instead of meeting them out.
I have actually gone places just to be able to check in there. Can anyone releate?
My problem is not with people who choose to eat out 10 times per week. It is that Foursquare tells people that it’s not OK to only eat out once a week. I don’t want to feel embarrassed or inferior for eating a turkey and cheese sandwich every day.
I'm Tyler Clark, a content and marketing guy, husband, dog owner, television enthusiast, music fan and professional salsa dancer. Look out, honey, 'cause I'm using technology. ![Image of Brothers (Amazon MP3 Exclusive Version) [+digital booklet]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51qiH%2B5E-PL._SL110_.jpg "Brothers (Amazon MP3 Exclusive Version) [+digital booklet]")
![Image of The Wild Hunt [+Digital Booklet]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41gexwLNYdL._SL110_.jpg "The Wild Hunt [+Digital Booklet]")
No offense, but kinda duh. Facebook encourages to spotlight people who broadcast their emotions and focuses on people who are fans of "coca cola," "ricky martin" and whatever else by telling you in your news feed. So in the same way Johnny is seen as a partier always rocking around town while Rick stays at home because he is boring. You don't want to be like Rick, do you?
Any good product now a days seems to be linked in getting people to spend. Reading this makes me draw an arrow to the goddamn iPad, the thing is there just for you to spend more. Apps, Books, and you need an adapter to do ANYTHING. The way I do kind of see it though, is that in a world where stuff is increasingly free, the price has to shift elsewhere. Tacking on accessories, extra stuff or hawking other companies' goods have been ways to adjust for lower prices for a while now. Let's just hope it doesn't get out of hand (because seriously, stores charging even $50 for an HDMI cable is such an unbelievable ripoff).
Thanks for your reply, Jim.
I not sure that I agree with you on this. In my opinion, the Foursquare/Facebook comparison is off because "fan"-ing Coca Cola isn't the focal point of Facebook. It doesn't reward people for "fan"-ing more companies. You can't be King of Coke if you buy enough of it. The fan pages are an afterthought. Going out to restaurants/bars/stores/etc. is exactly the point of Foursquare.
Furthermore, while I can appreciate that costs must go somewhere in a free-based economy, I don't know that I see how it relates to Foursquare. Foursquare isn't trying to upsell me anything to offset their costs. My problem goes to the entire subtle philosophy behind Foursquare: That people who spend more are better.
Of course this idea is everywhere in our culture–designer jeans, turning rich people into celebrities, etc.–but this feels much more tangible to me. It's pushing a consumer culture that I don't appreciate.
Well, I definitely need to say off the bat that i personally am not a big foursquare fan. The only time I really like it is when I travel. And creating all the mall food locations and becoming mayor because no one else is going to foursquare heck into a food mall location.
The country in general right now is driven by consumerism. To a point thats great, more opportunities for business people, entrepreneurs (and yes scammers) to make a decent living. It also does allow for innovation, for example the screen protectors people buy for phones are soon going to be made for glasses (kinda cool and useful).
And foursquare def needs to upsell you to do stuff to offset their costs. They make money by sponsors buying badges (at $10,000 a badge) to offer you for doing special things. Honestly, better than that facebook, which hasn't found a solid model yet for making money.
Businesses exist for people to make money. Now, i do agree i would rather have more businesses building bridges than selling Coach purses or O'Charley's dine in food. From a small business person's perspective, the opportunity to have a fun way to track customers (at their choice) while offering them benefits is pretty damn cool, and short term rewarding to all parties.
to be continued, i have a customer….
After spending about five minutes looking into Foursquare I decided to type "foursquare conspicuous consumption" into Google, and this blog came up. I take issue with Foursquare because first, I live in rural America (a town without a stoplight) and I can assure you that there are entire communities of people who don't equate their specific restaurant patronage with their self-worth, and second, the basic self-involvement of it is sickening. I'm 26 and I find it disheartening how people in my generation define themselves not by their accomplishments, but by their consumption of music, coffee, alcohol, etc.
Bill: Thanks for stopping by. I'm glad that you've jumped into the conversation.
You bring up great points. We're about the same age, and I'm glad that you're looking at issues of values and substance.