
Facebook’s Foray into Audio
Why are they doing it? And will it work?
Apr 27, 2021 · 12 min readUpdated May 21, 2026
We use analytics and advertising tools by default. You can update this anytime.

Why are they doing it? And will it work?
Apr 27, 2021 · 12 min readUpdated May 21, 2026
In a Discord conversation with Casey Newton, Mark Zuckerberg revealed that over the coming months, the social behemoth will be rolling out four new audio-centric features:
To support these new features with as much original content as possible, Facebook is also offering audio creators new monetization tools, and Facebook’s official announcement mentions an “Audio Creator Fund.” However, specific details have not been revealed as of now.
At one level, the reasons behind this are obvious: Facebook wants to monetize our ears, not just our eyes. The live audio room format invented by Clubhouse seems to be here to stay. The window seems to be closing for anyone wanting to capitalize on the open nature of the podcast ecosystem, given recent moves by Spotify and Apple.
But when you look closer, there’s a lot more to unpack. How coherently can audio actually co-exist inside the big blue app, juxtaposed with text-based and visual content? Does Facebook have the DNA required to build trust with creators? And what should we make of their increasingly muddled-seeming strategy?
In this essay, we first break down the chances each of these new audio features have of success, and then take a step back to understand Facebook’s vision of where they see themselves in the creator economy, and how they plan to get there.
So let’s dive in!
First, let’s dissect Facebook’s new features on a micro level:
Integrating Clubhouse-style live audio chat rooms within Facebook Groups is likely to work pretty well. First, the Groups product has recently become a major priority for Facebook, with 1.8 billion users participating in them every month. Groups are more engaging because of the common interests members share, and almost act as a proxy for an interest graph. This shared context feels like the right environment for high-value live audio rooms, because it’s built around communities with pre-existing relationships and shared values. The best rooms combine some sense of familiarity with the novelty of speaking to strangers online. Plus, Groups have leadership structures that can provide better context-specific moderation than Facebook ever could at the platform level.
But while an integration of live audio content within Facebook Groups seems like a thoughtful product strategy, their other product announcements seem to us more reactive and ill-considered.
Let’s take Soundbites, for example. We’re not sure many people want to create or listen to short audio clips on Facebook. If Twitter’s version of this feature (audio tweets) has taught us anything, it is that short-form audio content doesn’t work well in a feed of mostly text and visual posts. While text is scannable, the content of short-form audio is completely unknowable unless the listener chooses to engage. This makes for a higher friction user experience, not to mention the host of content moderation challenges that come along with it.
And then there’s the decision to integrate music and podcasts into the app. Unless they plan to build a dedicated section of the app devoted to audio discovery—essentially a full-blown Spotify competitor—it seems unlikely that many users would start at Facebook when they need something to listen to. Audio is a distinct habit from scrolling through feeds, and gets triggered by different circumstances. There is some value in being able to tap a button and play audio instantly, rather than jump into a different app to play audio, but in our opinion not that much. The real value in audio is being the top-level habit that people go directly to when they want to listen to something. And it seems unlikely that Facebook is going to earn that position.
Even though some of these moves look reactive, there are at least a few reasons to be optimistic about Facebook’s chances in the audio market.
For one, their decision to build within the shared-interest context of Facebook Groups could help them create a sticky experience for those users. Facebook Groups are heavily relied on by university cohorts and high school classes—so much so that Facebook launched Facebook Campus last year to foster a more education-focused network and attract Gen Zers. If Facebook can effectively lean into these established networks, they have a strong chance at succeeding.
Moreover, Facebook owns one of the most relevant social platforms today—Instagram. Integrating social audio experiences within Instagram could potentially drive top-of-funnel discovery into new audio rooms. This might be a significant advantage because social audio consumption decisions are very personality-driven. Since we already follow our favorite creators on Instagram, they can seamlessly redirect us to the rooms they’re hosting.
Facebook also has the resources to deploy dynamic ad insertion technology across all its platforms. They’ve been doing this for video content creators, and deploying the same technology in the audio space doesn’t seem like a long stretch. Ad-based monetization across a network of 3 billion users could make it extremely lucrative for audio creators, beyond direct monetization methods such as tipping and subscriptions.
In short, if Facebook leverages its inherent strengths it has a good chance to win the ongoing race for audio dominance.
But of course, at this point, any attempt to analyse Facebook’s new audio products on a granular level is bound to be speculative. However, exploring the reasons behind why they decided to get into audio in the first place might help us understand what's really going on at Facebook: how the business is doing, it's strengths, weaknesses, and the role it sees itself playing in shaping the future of the creator economy.
First, Facebook has been fairly proficient at capturing our attention when we’re looking at our phones, but until now they haven’t captured any of the time people spend listening to their phones. This is an opportunity to grow their advertising business without needing to add more users—especially important in mature markets like the US. Although Spotify is leading the way in dynamic audio ad-insertion technology, if Facebook can capture the attention it’s hard to imagine they won’t be able to monetize it better than Spotify, given their superior targeting capabilities.
But the risk is—how to attract attention? This is where creators come in.
Attention is shifting from our social connections to our creator fandoms. Watching MrBeast offering people $100,000 to quit their jobs, or Emma Chamberlain eating fast food for breakfast seems to attract way more eyeballs compared to links shared or life updates from a distant relative. Creators have a much stronger connection with their fans because of shared interests—making fans choose them over their social connections. That’s why Facebook is integrating monetization features for creators from the start, like tipping, and it’s why they’re building an “audio creator fund” which perhaps will look something like Snapchat’s Spotlight fund.
For now, unlike other creator economy platforms, it seems like Facebook has no plans to generate revenue from taking a cut of payments from users to creators. Instead, they will take zero fees, and use creator content as a way to increase engagement, which increases advertising impressions. But what if the advertising business were to face challenges? For example, Apple’s new privacy features in iOS 14 will be a big setback for Facebook. And during the pandemic, even though more people are spending more time than ever before on Facebook, ad revenues still experienced a noticeable decline as businesses decided to cut back on their advertising spending. Advertising is already making a strong comeback, but one lens to view Facebook’s creator economy ambitions is as a hedge, just in case they need to diversify their revenue streams beyond advertising.
But wouldn’t it be easier to just buy creator economy platforms like Clubhouse and Substack instead of going to the trouble of cloning it? The problem is, Facebook can no longer rely on their old-school ‘see and conquer’ strategy due to increasing scrutiny from the FTC. Since Facebook can’t acquire emerging platforms with promising network effects, they are trying to replicate them in-house.
Of course, that’s easier said than done.
The reach that Facebook products enable is significantly greater than any other platform in the creator economy—more than 3 billion people use one of Facebook’s platforms. If social platforms help us play status games, then Facebook offers the largest arena possible. There’s a reason why creators like MrBeast and PewDiePie are redistributing their popular YouTube content on Facebook.
Facebook is also set to offer audio creators a host of monetization opportunities:
Facebook wants to leverage its inherent strengths as a platform, paired with monetization features to play an active role in the growing creator economy.
But they might have overplayed their hand.
So far, Facebook’s creator oriented product rollouts have been reactionary and defensive—a smattering of fragmented tools, with overlapping uses and confusing eligibility requirements—which they attempt to explain on their creator page. A quick look at the current suite of monetisation tools they provide reveals a lack of focus:
Creators are confused with these fragmented monetization opportunities. This bloated suite of creator tools is not because Facebook doesn’t understand the creator economy. It might just be a function of the internal engineering and product resources Facebook has. Its New Product Experimentation (NPE) team is constantly churning out new derivatives of existing networks, figuring out what catches traction and what doesn’t.
But just because Facebook can replicate, doesn’t mean they should. As the classic strategy expert Michael Porter once said: “Strategy is about choice. Strategy means saying no to certain kinds of things.” Every company, no matter how powerful and large, needs to have a cohesive strategy. Facebook’s constant experimentation confuses creators and makes them feel like they’re building on unsteady ground. They eventually need to pick something they can do and be good at it—instead of trying to do everything.
What Happened?
What Happened?
What Happened?
What Happened?
What Happened?
What Happened?
What Happened?
The essential toolkit for those shaping the future
"This might be the best value you
can get from an AI subscription."
- Jay S.
Join 100,000+ leaders, builders, and innovators

Already have an account? Sign in.
Daily insights from AI pioneers + early access to powerful AI tools
Comments