5 ms·

Why don’t these publishers band together and launch their own news aggregator if they think that’s something people want? I don’t see Facebook owing them a plat

Why don’t these publishers band together and launch their own news aggregator if they think that’s something people want? I don’t see Facebook owing them a platform here and from a personal perspective politics can’t be removed from my _social_ feed fast enough.

sharemywin 9y ago
but if you spent a bunch of time liking/following things on facebook and it's not in your feed anymore, a good chuck of your "experience" is gone. so it's not just the publishers that are losing out. Personally, I hate facebook and don't use it.
- malvosenior 9y ago
  I think if that was going to be a major issue for user engagement that FB wouldn’t be making this move.
- surge 9y ago
  Yeah, the more they "improve" it, the less I want to use it.
anigbrowl 9y ago
- Journalists =/= publishers - Ignores non-negligible capital costs - Complaining about politics in your social feed is asinine since many people are interested in politics and choose to share that interest socially, so you're gonna hear about it anyway
- malvosenior 9y ago
  > Journalists =/= publishers The article is about publishers (and the journalists who work for them). Not independent journalists/bloggers. > Ignores non-negligible capital costs That’s the same problem every service in the internet has. It’s pretty cheap to get started though so costs would come as usage scaled up. > Complaining about politics in your social feed is asinine since many people are interested in politics and choose to share that interest socially, so you're gonna hear about it anyway I would unfriend or mute those people so not sure why my point is “asinine”. In fact if your friends are talking about politics then this article’s topic is non-applicable since it’s not about filtering content produced by your friends.
  - em3rgent0rdr 9y ago
    > unfriend or mute those people... It's funny how these comments illustrate how different people use Facebook for different things. I for one mute people who post too much personal stuff, so I rather primarily use fb for discussing politics.
    - malvosenior 9y ago
      Indeed. For me it’s nice to catch up on the truly personal moments my friends are having. Politics has invaded every aspect of life (professional, media saturation, Internet discussion...) so it’s nice to be able to tailor FB enough to not see it there.
      - mcny 9y ago
        For me, Facebook is just messenger - a fancy Rolodex. A way to get in touch with period you don't talk to often enough to always have their updated contract information. Get caught up and move the conversation elsewhere as soon as I can — be it WhatsApp or signal. I can't trust the feed to show me everything in a reverse chronological order so it is worthless to me. In hindsight, I must agree that WhatsApp was a good buy and probably a good thing for Facebook to own.
cwperkins 9y ago
Exactly this - when did Facebook become a platform for everyone I'm associated with to blurt their opinions. I think there needs to be another forum because the only thing I am interested in using Facebook for is to catch up on my friends doings. Weddings, vacations, etc.
- AndrewKemendo 9y ago
  It philosophically transitioned away from the "personal friend update feed" to the "hub of all social networking on the internet" a few years ago. I just kind of realized that happened in the last few months and it wierds me out. What used to be personal stuff between friends and family, they want you to share with everyone.
  - edejong 9y ago
    Key takeaway is: what you think is personal stuff on a social site, never really was to begin with.
- zjaffee 9y ago
  For most younger people, the solution to this is some combination of snapchat and instagram.
PakG1 9y ago
Journalists creating a new service wouldn't have an impact on whether your feed has politics. Only Facebook and your Facebook friends can influence that.
medfok 9y ago
If you construct a community resource, you have a responsibility to the community. This transcends business interest, which is illegitimate and immoral. If you want to be a part of my life you need to be responsible.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- gt_ 9y ago
  As things stand, Facebook has no responsibility beyond those required by law and market. This is not an endorsement of anything, but a reminder of the reality.
  - jeffdavis 9y ago
    No, they have no legal responsibilities beyond those required by law. If they behave unethically we can certainly complain about it, and possibly take some kind of action if we feel strongly enough (e.g. boycott).
    - gt_ 9y ago
      Like I said, they have a responsibility defined by the market. I’m not sure how your argument extends their responsibility any more than I did. You comment concerning the users’ freedoms is, sure, correct; that’s the market I’m talking about. Please clarify your argument if you have one.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

sharemywin 9y ago

but if you spent a bunch of time liking/following things on facebook and it's not in your feed anymore, a good chuck of your "experience" is gone. so it's not just the publishers that are losing out. Personally, I hate facebook and don't use it.

malvosenior 9y ago
I think if that was going to be a major issue for user engagement that FB wouldn’t be making this move.
surge 9y ago
Yeah, the more they "improve" it, the less I want to use it.

anigbrowl 9y ago

- Journalists =/= publishers - Ignores non-negligible capital costs - Complaining about politics in your social feed is asinine since many people are interested in politics and choose to share that interest socially, so you're gonna hear about it anyway

malvosenior 9y ago
> Journalists =/= publishers The article is about publishers (and the journalists who work for them). Not independent journalists/bloggers. > Ignores non-negligible capital costs That’s the same problem every service in the internet has. It’s pretty cheap to get started though so costs would come as usage scaled up. > Complaining about politics in your social feed is asinine since many people are interested in politics and choose to share that interest socially, so you're gonna hear about it anyway I would unfriend or mute those people so not sure why my point is “asinine”. In fact if your friends are talking about politics then this article’s topic is non-applicable since it’s not about filtering content produced by your friends.
- em3rgent0rdr 9y ago
  > unfriend or mute those people... It's funny how these comments illustrate how different people use Facebook for different things. I for one mute people who post too much personal stuff, so I rather primarily use fb for discussing politics.
  - malvosenior 9y ago
    Indeed. For me it’s nice to catch up on the truly personal moments my friends are having. Politics has invaded every aspect of life (professional, media saturation, Internet discussion...) so it’s nice to be able to tailor FB enough to not see it there.
    - mcny 9y ago
      For me, Facebook is just messenger - a fancy Rolodex. A way to get in touch with period you don't talk to often enough to always have their updated contract information. Get caught up and move the conversation elsewhere as soon as I can — be it WhatsApp or signal. I can't trust the feed to show me everything in a reverse chronological order so it is worthless to me. In hindsight, I must agree that WhatsApp was a good buy and probably a good thing for Facebook to own.

cwperkins 9y ago

Exactly this - when did Facebook become a platform for everyone I'm associated with to blurt their opinions. I think there needs to be another forum because the only thing I am interested in using Facebook for is to catch up on my friends doings. Weddings, vacations, etc.

AndrewKemendo 9y ago
It philosophically transitioned away from the "personal friend update feed" to the "hub of all social networking on the internet" a few years ago. I just kind of realized that happened in the last few months and it wierds me out. What used to be personal stuff between friends and family, they want you to share with everyone.
- edejong 9y ago
  Key takeaway is: what you think is personal stuff on a social site, never really was to begin with.
zjaffee 9y ago
For most younger people, the solution to this is some combination of snapchat and instagram.

PakG1 9y ago

Journalists creating a new service wouldn't have an impact on whether your feed has politics. Only Facebook and your Facebook friends can influence that.

medfok 9y ago

If you construct a community resource, you have a responsibility to the community. This transcends business interest, which is illegitimate and immoral. If you want to be a part of my life you need to be responsible.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
gt_ 9y ago
As things stand, Facebook has no responsibility beyond those required by law and market. This is not an endorsement of anything, but a reminder of the reality.
- jeffdavis 9y ago
  No, they have no legal responsibilities beyond those required by law. If they behave unethically we can certainly complain about it, and possibly take some kind of action if we feel strongly enough (e.g. boycott).
  - gt_ 9y ago
    Like I said, they have a responsibility defined by the market. I’m not sure how your argument extends their responsibility any more than I did. You comment concerning the users’ freedoms is, sure, correct; that’s the market I’m talking about. Please clarify your argument if you have one.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]