Twitter started it, then Facebook joined in, and now there are rumors from Google: the big players are competing with Social Live!
In reality, it was Meerkat that paved the way with its long and complex battle against Periscope. It’s 2015: mobile video streaming is in its infancy, and users are starting to upload a flood of videos. You could already follow live comments, check connected users, and count likes and hearts. Both systems were simple and easy to use, very efficient, and also fun. Both apps allowed access via Twitter. Sure, Meerkat appeared a bit more crowded in its design, while Periscope showed graphics more in line with iOS.
It’s hard to say which one prevailed during 2015. Periscope’s ability to start private streams was excellent. Meerkat’s gamification elements were effective: users watched or broadcasted videos and earned points on the global leaderboard.
Then came Facebook Live, which, after a trial phase, made live streams accessible to everyone. So Meerkat set aside the live streaming model but didn’t give it up entirely: the CEO explained that he was working on a “social network where everyone is always live.” Meanwhile, Facebook provided various filters and the ability to create a live stream within a group of friends or an event. Those following the live stream could, as with any post, show their reaction or post a comment, which the live stream author would see in real-time. Facebook also allowed inviting friends to follow a live stream and access a map showing where users were broadcasting from. Additionally, the comment feed was maintained even in “replay” videos watched after the live stream. In this regard, statistics showed a greater influx of comments during live streams, probably because viewers saw the person reading their comment. In short, more and more engagement and interaction!
The battle between Facebook and Periscope is open: live streaming is integrated into FB, while Periscope is an app that needs to be downloaded; FB splits the screen in half, with the top part for the live stream and the bottom part for comments, Periscope uses the whole screen and allows both vertical and horizontal orientation, showing interactions in overlay; on FB, the live video remains in the profile timeline, on Periscope for a maximum of 24 hours. The differences are quite a few, and it’s up to you to judge which is better after trying both. At the end of January, FB Live had about 900 million users, Periscope 10 million.
Now Google is plotting another challenge by preparing an app called YouTube Connect, which would have functions similar to Periscope and Facebook Live. Google is reserving comments for now, perhaps until May 18, when the big developer conference, Google I/O, will be held.
In the meantime, we just have to try a live stream and wait for the news!
