Hacker News Reader

Comment by jonny_eh | Hacker News Reader

They needed to rename the company anyway to get away from bad press. It worked. I think they're quite happy with their current name.

View on HN

Yup. The Facebook brand was long dead, and Meta is a good tech name even outside of AR/VR or metaverse. The fact that no one calls the company Facebook anymore shows that the rebrand was successful.

Very few outside of tech call it Meta. Just like no one calls Alphabet "Alphabet", they just say "Google".

It's very different though. Alphabet was created more for financial book keeping. Google apps have no Alphabet branding. On the other hand, Meta was created because the Facebook brand was down in the rabbit hole, almost every product of it has the Meta branding prominently displayed.

Anecdotal but my parents know about Meta, because they use FB/Messenger daily. They have no idea what Alphabet is.

>> The fact that no one calls the company Facebook anymore shows that the rebrand was successful.

Don't they? I have to remind myself that it's actually called Meta, I always call it facebook.

I still see people refer to “FAANG” regularly. Though, there have been times I’ve read “MAANG”… doesn’t quite feel the same.

I’ve heard MANGA suggested as the acronym with Facebook’s new name. Though maybe it should be MAAAN, said in a tone of exasperation at tech company activities

> It worked.

Debatable.

Is it really? Instagram, arguably the most popular (or maybe just behind TikTok, I'm not sure) social network currently, has successfully disengaged from the tainted Facebook name entirely. It may seem like a small thing but I do think that has a deep impact on the average person's perception of the service. Especially in the younger generation, the Facebook name has a definite "ick" to it (is that what the kids say these days?), even if it's just because it's the "boomer social network" and not because of the myriad privacy concerns associated with it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com