
Here's a story about the history of the Like button that you might like
Like it or not, the button has served as a creative catalyst, a dopamine delivery system and an emotional battering ram. It also became an international tourist attraction after Facebook plastered the symbol on a giant sign on that stood outside its Silicon Valley headquarters until the company rebranded itself as Meta Platforms in 2021.
A new book, 'Like: The Button That Changed The World," delves into the convoluted story behind a symbol that's become both the manna and bane of a digitally driven society.
It's a tale that traces back to gladiator battles for survival during the Roman empire before fast-forwarding to the early 21st century when technology trailblazers such as Yelp co-founder Russ Simmons, Twitter co-founder Biz Stone, PayPal co-founder Max Levchin, YouTube co-founder Steve Chen, and Gmail inventor Paul Buchheit were experimenting with different ways using the currency of recognition to prod people to post compelling content online for free.
As part of that noodling, a Yelp employee named Bob Goodson sat down on May 18, 2005, and drew a crude sketch of thumbs up and thumbs down gesture as a way for people to express their opinions about restaurant reviews posted on the site. Yelp passed on adopting Goodson's suggested symbol and, instead, adopted the 'useful,' 'funny' and 'cool' buttons conceived by Simmons. But the discovery of that old sketch inspired Goodson to team up with Martin Reeves to explore how the Like button came to be in their new book.
'It's something simple and also elegant because the Like button says, 'I like you, I like your content. And I am like you. I like you because I am like you, I am part of your tribe,' ' Reeves said during an interview with The Associated Press. 'But it's very hard to answer the simple question, 'Well, who invented the Like button?' '
The social wellspring behind a social symbol
Although Facebook is the main reason the Like button became so ubiquitous, the company didn't invent it and almost discarded it as drivel. It took Facebook nearly two years to overcome the staunch resistance by CEO Mark Zuckerberg before finally introducing the symbol on its service on February 9, 2009 — five years after the social network's creation in a Harvard University dorm room.
As happens with many innovations, the Like button was born out of necessity but it wasn't the brainchild of a single person. The concept percolated for more than a decade in a Silicon Valley before Facebook finally embraced it.
'Innovation is often social and Silicon Valley was the right place for all this happen because it has a culture of meet-ups, although it's less so now,' Reeves said. 'Everyone was getting together to talk about what they were working on at that time and it turned out a lot of them were working on the same stuff.'
The effort to create a simple mechanism to digitally express approval or dismay sprouted from a wellspring of online services such as Yelp and YouTube whose success would hinge on their ability to post commentary or video that would help make their sites even more popular without forcing them to spend a lot of money for content. That effort required a feedback loop that wouldn't require a lot of hoops to navigate.
Hollywood's role in the Like button's saga
And when Goodson was noodling around with his thumbs-up and thumbs-down gesture, it didn't come out of a vacuum. Those techniques of signaling approval and disapproval had been ushered into the 21st century zeitgeist by the Academy Award-winning movie, 'Gladiator,' where Emperor Commodus — portrayed by actor Joaquin Phoenix — used the gestures to either spare or slay combatants in the arena.
But the positive feelings conjured by a thumbs up date even further back in popular culture, thanks to the 1950s-era character Fonzie played by Henry Winkler in the top-rated 1970s TV series, 'Happy Days.' The gesture later became a way of expressing delight with a program via a remote control button for the digital video recorders made by TiVO during the early 2000s. Around the same time, Hot or Not — a site that solicited feedback on the looks of people who shared photos of themselves — began playing around with ideas that helped inspire the Like button, based on the book's research.
Others that contributed to the pool of helpful ideas included the pioneering news service Digg, the blogging platform Xanga, YouTube and another early video site, Vimeo.
The button's big breakthrough
But Facebook unquestionably turned the Like button into a universally understood symbol, while also profiting the most from its entrance into the mainstream. And it almost didn't happen.
By 2007, Facebook engineers had been tinkering with a Like button, but Zuckerberg opposed it because he feared the social network was already getting too cluttered and, Reeves said, 'is he didn't actually want to do something that would be seen as trivial, that would cheapen the service.'
But FriendFeed, a rival social network created by Buchheit and now OpenAI Chairman Bret Taylor, had no such qualms, and unveiled its own Like button in October 2007.
But the button wasn't successful enough to keep the lights on at FriendFeed, and the service ended up being acquired by Facebook. By the time that deal was completed, Facebook had already introduced a Like button — only after Zuckerberg rebuffed the original idea of calling it an Awesome button 'because nothing is more awesome than awesome,' according to the book's research.
Once Zuckerberg relented, Facebook quickly saw that the Like button not only helped keep its audience engaged on its social network but also made it easier to divine people's individual interests and gather the insights required to sell the targeted advertising that accounted for most of Meta Platform's $165 billion in revenue last year. The button's success encouraged Facebook to take things even further by allowing other digital services to ingrain it into their feedback loops and then, in 2016, added six more types of emotions — 'love,' 'care,' 'haha,' 'wow,' 'sad,' and 'angry.'
Facebook hasn't publicly disclosed how many responses it has accumulated from the Like button and its other related options, but Levchin told the book's authors that he believes the company has probably logged trillions of them. 'What content is liked by humans...is probably one of the singularly most valuable things on the internet,' Levchin said in the book.
The Like button also has created an epidemic of emotional problems, especially among adolescents, who feel forlorn if their posts are ignored and narcissists whose egos feast on the positive feedback. Reeves views those issues as part of the unintentional consequences that inevitably happen because 'if you can't even predict the beneficial effects of a technological innovation how could you possibly forecast the side effects and the interventions?'
Even so, Reeves believes the Like button and the forces that coalesced to create it tapped into something uniquely human.
'We thought serendipity of the innovation was part of the point,' Reeves said. 'And I don't think we can get bored with liking or having our capacity to compliment taken away so easily because it's the product of 100,000 years of evolution.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


USA Today
34 minutes ago
- USA Today
Gay influencer couple Probably This broke up. The response is alarming at best.
Are we, as a society, OK when relationships ending on any sort of stage sends ripples across tens of thousands of people eager to engage in an algorithmic bloodletting? If you've spent any amount of time on the internet, you've probably heard this one before: Internet couple attracts an audience. Internet couple breaks up. Former internet couple's followers try to figure out who gets custody in the split. There's several somethings to be said about living your relationships Extremely Online in an attention economy, and they mostly boil down to this: Influencers are not your #RelationshipGoals. We were reminded of that again recently. On Aug. 16, influencers Probably This – a couple comprising Matt Armato (bald) and Beau Ciolino (not bald) – published a now-deleted video announcing they broke up after 12 years. I found their Instagram account in the depths of my 2020 pandemic doomscrolling and clicked the follow button for their design, renovation and decoration of a charming New Orleans home. Five years later, they've called it quits, but cited an enduring mutual respect and care for each other as they move on. (Armato got the Probably This TikTok account and Ciolino got the Instagram.) From one bald gay to another (though, I promise, not exclusively because of that), I empathize with Armato, whose clear discomfort was the impetus for the audience to scathingly pick Ciolino apart. Accusations of cheating, assumptions about open relationships and critiques of their differing demeanors (Ciolino seemed bubbly in a nervous way; Armato appeared quietly devastated) filled the comment sections of the now-deleted video. The discourse is discoursing, which prompted Armato to post a story highlight to his Instagram page. 'I know the video has sparked a lot of reactions,' Armato writes. 'Please know that there are no teams here. I see your compassion and I appreciate it, but if your support for me looks like tearing him down I don't want it.' People break up. The internet has changed what that looks like. People break up. Everyone does that. But the internet has changed our relationship with how relationships conclude, and it leaves us all spinning through the vacuum where there should be space, peace and processing. Because Armato and Ciolino made a living, at least on some level, by putting their relationship online and commodifying their personal lives, they felt they owed it to their audiences to explain their separation. I'm not part of their relationship, and I don't pretend to be an expert on either one of them. I've followed their content casually at best. But like Facebook rolling out legacy pages for dead users, we're still in the nascent stages of an internet that continues to redefine itself and the relationships around us. As a result, we're not thinking about what happens when a relationship publicly implodes, and our mileage in the aftermath may vary. In this case, we've gone from tablescapes to tribunals. I live for the mess. But we're not entitled to any of it. Admittedly, I live for it. I also desperately need us all to collectively march out our front doors and touch the nearest patch of grass. Perhaps it's that when gay audiences see gay people in relationships, they receive outsize attention and parasocial projections both on the relationship as a concept and also the individuals within them because of the representation the community sees from them – especially considering the historic lack of representation we've felt in spaces that were not ours to create. But, gay people set conveniently aside, the thematic thread in any kind of online relationship is that we're buying what they're selling in an economy predicated on attention. That comes with the highs and, for the more patient among us, the perceived ultimate low: the breakup that unfolds just as much online as the relationship did. Everyone loves a messy fight – at least, at my messiest, I'd water the sidewalk if it meant I could be nosy about an argument down the street – so social media is an ideal front porch to eavesdrop in real time as people and relationships unravel. Still, our parasocial relationships with these couples threaten to (and often do) shift our role as passive observers into active participants. We're not just watching and liking. We're commenting and taking sides in a void of context. Our currency becomes zingy reads and memetic reaction images and backhanded messages of support for one person or the other. That can't be healthy for any of us. Not for an audience that misunderstands our place in a relationship that has invited us in as casual observers. Not for a couple or content creator navigating a difficult space that sees their comment section revolting against the absence of a relationship that doesn't exist anymore. And not for the people somewhere in between, navigating a spew of videos by and about couples who aren't together anymore. What do influencers actually owe you? It's easy to wave this off as a piece of non-reality – it's not real and can't hurt us – but as our younger generations continue to experience higher levels of isolation, the internet grows as a bastion of community and connections, and thus the real-world impacts become more undeniable. The internet is real and it can hurt you. Perhaps there's some schadenfreude there in getting to see the walls crumble down and reality peek through. Real relationships and real people are deeply complicated, take a metric ton of work and you are not promised your idea of success. Seeing that stripped away thrills us because it's a reminder that the influencers who dupe us into buying their display of perfection are not all they pretend to be. It's fine to admire what you aspire for. It's good, even, to identify and appreciate that you have representation. But also accept that you are only getting the version of the story influencers choose for you. This is an attention economy, and they benefit from obfuscating the truth. It should not stop us from pursuing our own and living our lives defined by our own rules. The reality is that we never should've been idolizing relationships like Probably This – or the people who actually live them – to begin with. Otherwise, we're living in a digital panopticon of our own making. Did that former influencer couple ever really owe anyone the truth? And are we, as a society, OK when relationships ending on any sort of stage sends ripples across tens of thousands of people eager to engage in an algorithmic bloodletting? Probably not. Drew Atkins is an opinion digital producer for USA TODAY and the USA TODAY Network. Reach him at aatkins@

Refinery29
an hour ago
- Refinery29
Louis Vuitton Beauty Is Almost Here — & I Tried Everything First
Louis Vuitton has always been synonymous with fashion and travel accessories, and now, the iconic French maison is expanding its collection of luxury goods (including a fragrance range that launched in 2016) to bet big on makeup. Today marks a new chapter in the heritage brand's history with La Beauté Louis Vuitton, a debut collection of beauty products that combines signature LV house codes. And behind it all? Iconic makeup artist Dame Pat McGrath, as creative director. 'Working backstage for over 20 years at Louis Vuitton fashion shows, I am thrilled to now play such a key role in the launch of La Beauté Louis Vuitton, which is the result of extraordinary craftsmanship, creativity and innovation,' McGrath says via press release. The inaugural lineup includes lipstick, lip balm and a curated array of eyeshadow palettes, all conceived as cosmetics, yes, but also objets d'art to be kept, refilled and treasured for years to come. Let's start with LV Rouge lipstick. Available in 55 shades (a subtle nod to the Roman numerals LV) and two finishes (matte and satin), infused with lip-loving ingredients like shea butter and hyaluronic acid, plus waxes derived from rose, jasmine and mimosa flowers. Each lipstick bullet is stamped with the iconic LV monogram and features the signature monogram flower on the cap. Taking the sensorial experience to the next level, the lipsticks are scented with a custom floral fragrance developed by house perfumer Jacques Cavallier Belletrud. As I swiped on the various shades, they felt like the equivalent of couture on my lips; the shades are dimensional and beautifully pigmented, and feel comfortable and effortless on my lips. Monogram Rouge, a muted warm red that almost wears like a neutral, feels as effortlessly chic as French girl beauty always — and rather deceptively — appears. It doesn't feel makeup-y or lipstick-y, but rather like a luxury accessory that brings your entire look to life. Next, there's LV Baume — the most luxurious lip balm I have ever tried. Available in 10 shades (including clear), the hydrating formula adds a sheer tint that brings lips to life. (My favourite of the bunch: Monogram Touch, a sheer chocolate brown that echoes the unmistakable initials on the iconic LV canvas.) Like the lipsticks, the balms are also gently scented with a subtle raspberry-mint fragrance and are easily refillable. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Louis Vuitton (@louisvuitton) Last, but not least, adorn your eyelids with the LV Ombres eyeshadow quads, which are available in eight distinct colour stories. Ranging from luminous beige to lipstick-inspired (and surprisingly wearable) burgundy, the silky, pigmented shadows are gentle on the eyes, thanks to moisturising ingredients like plant-derived squalane and camelina flower oil extract. Best of all, the quads take the guesswork out of picking shades that work together in a single eye look. (These gorgeous palettes are also refillable, but note that each petal-shaped pan is magnetised individually and requires a bit of finesse to swap in and out.) The full collection drops on 25th August, so be sure to set those alarms if you want to own a piece of luxury beauty history. (And when we say 'luxury', we mean it: LV Rouge and LV Baume retail for £120 each, and LV Ombres go for £190.) 'I've always said makeup is more than product: it's performance, obsession and emotion,' McGrath says. 'This new chapter is about pushing craftsmanship into a new realm.'


USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Steelers welcome legendary band Linkin Park to practice
The Pittsburgh Steelers had some special guests at practice on Tuesday — none other than the legendary band Linkin Park. One of the greatest rock bands of their generation, Linkin Park had a front-row seat to intense action at practice — with Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's Brian Batko reporting that Aaron Rodgers played a role in their attendance. Linkin Park's Mike Shinoda, Brad Delson, Joe Hahn, David Farrell, Colin Brittain, Alex Feder, and Emily Armstrong — the new co-vocalist following the late-great Chester Bennington's passing in 2017 — had a show later that night at the Pittsburgh Penguins' PPG Paints Arena, part of their From Zero World Tour. Their next stop is Nashville, Tennessee, at the Bridgestone Arena on August 21, but the Steelers won't forget the surprise appearance of the iconic Linkin Park. The Pittsburgh Steelers will need to shake off the starstruck nerves in a hurry, as they travel to take on the Carolina Panthers in their preseason finale on Thursday, August 21, at 7:00 PM EST — which you can learn more about here. For up-to-date Steelers coverage, follow us on X @TheSteelersWire and give our Facebook page a like.