6 ms·

To be clear, Facebook has ended the ability to automatically post _anything_ to a personal profile. More details: https://betanews.com/2018/08/02/twitter-faceb

To be clear, Facebook has ended the ability to automatically post _anything_ to a personal profile. More details: https://betanews.com/2018/08/02/twitter-facebook-crossposts-stop/ https://betanews.com/2018/08/02/twitter-facebook-crossposts-...

jpatokal 8y ago
This includes most blog integrations, eg. being able to configure Wordpress to post a plug on your personal FB when you write something in your blog.
- AndrewDucker 8y ago
  Yup. I had DlvrIt posting my blog posts to Facebook, and now that doesn't work.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Good! This means more open distribution methods (email) will be given priority again. I don't want Facebook, nor Twitter. Just take my email address and send me your content, or offer an RSS feed. EDIT: Anyone know if this kills Buffer and other social feed managers?
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    Good - if you don't like/use Facebook. For people who like/use it (and there are many), this is a very sad day.
    - toomuchtodo 8y ago
      What the walled garden giveth, it taketh away. Build on someone's platform? Depend on it exclusively? Gonna have a bad time. You would think folks would learn by now.
      - ConceptJunkie 8y ago
        The real problem is that if 80% of your audience is in the walled garden, and no more than 10% of your audience is on any one of the many other alternatives, you're kind of stuck if you want to reach as many of them as possible easily.
        toomuchtodo 8y ago
        It’s not your audience; it’s Facebook’s audience. You’ve just been granted the temporary privilege of access to them with no further guarantees.
    - SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
      Presumably people wanting to post links to their personal blog can still open up Facebook in a new tab and Ctrl-V the link in themselves, which will take them all of about 10 seconds. Seems a small price to pay if it cuts down the ridiculous amount of botspam on the platform.
      - TeMPOraL 8y ago
        This can - and is - used to argue against anything that enables users to do more. This thinking is part of the reason why computing for regular people has only fraction of the utility it could have.
        ConceptJunkie 8y ago
        Yes. Following that idea to its logical conclusion would mean getting rid of computers entirely.
    - mindcrime 8y ago
      For people who like/use it (and there are many), this is a very sad day. Only temporarily. Once folks move off of Facebook and onto something better, they'll realize that this was a Good Thing overall.
  - adenner 8y ago
    Yes, this kills buffer's ability to post to profiles, however pages and groups are still allowed. https://faq.buffer.com/article/985-publish-facebook-api-changes https://faq.buffer.com/article/985-publish-facebook-api-chan...
  - s73v3r_ 8y ago
    "This means more open distribution methods (email) will be given priority again." While that would be nice, I'm not holding my breath.
- gm-conspiracy 8y ago
  Yes, this was part of their "security" change after the Cambridge Analytica debacle. Although, any site using their JS API can still get your name, email and a unique ID, posting is now restricted via a FB modal or pop-up (which is blocked by more recent browsers). I think this happened in May/June of this year, IIRC.
  - idoh 8y ago
    The change went live on August 1, where they deprecated the "publish_actions" permission.
    - gm-conspiracy 8y ago
      They stopped new app approval for awhile, prior to the official deprecation announcement.
dao- 8y ago
Except for Instagram posts, presumably?
- AndrewDucker 8y ago
  Yup, Instagram still works.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - whoisthisfor 8y ago
    Maybe the EU will slap them with a fine.
  - brownkonas 8y ago
    This seems like this will trigger anti-trust proceedings.
    - bena 8y ago
      How so? Facebook is owned by Facebook. Facebook is simply not allowing other services to post on a user's behalf. Those other services still exist, Facebook is not a public good, etc.
      - bobthepanda 8y ago
        Google Shopping was fined over less: https://www.tnooz.com/article/google-shopping-decision-sets-precedent-which-could-decide-future-of-google-flights/ https://www.tnooz.com/article/google-shopping-decision-sets-... Large companies, particularly in the EU, are not allowed to throw their weight around to privilege their own services and apps.
        bena 8y ago
        That's not "less". That's way more. Google prioritizing their offerings over other vendors on a search they control is far different than "Can't post on Facebook from Twitter". Google has put itself forward as a fairly agnostic search. No one signs up to be indexed by Google. It works more like a common good. So when Google starts offering a service, then puts its own offerings before others in its search. That's dirty pool. But that's not what's happening here. Facebook is a platform to connect with other people who are also on Facebook. It doesn't purport to be a central hub for anything but Facebook. It's just not allowing Twitter (and others) to post on users' behalf.
mrweasel 8y ago
I wonder what the reasoning behind this is. It seems that it would reduce the amount of content on Facebook. Perhaps the thought is that people will go and post directly to Facebook instead? Or it could be a way of reducing noice/spam.
- ghaff 8y ago
  Apparently it's part of further locking down their API (https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/01/psa-cross-posting-tweets-to-facebook-no-longer-works-as-of-today/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/01/psa-cross-posting-tweets-t...) so that random apps that have been given permission to post by default can no longer do so. The way I read it, people who deliberately want to cross-post tweets are essentially collateral damage.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    Why couldn't they blanket-deauth all Facebook apps (or maybe just ones authed before this year, or sth.) instead? People would fix the apps they still use. And really, publishing apps on FB is not a real problem; apps exfiltrating data is.
    - ceejayoz 8y ago
      Apps exfiltrating is one problem. Bots posing as real people to rile up racial/political/etc. tensions is another, and this approach helps a bit there.
      - TeMPOraL 8y ago
        This won't help much. Evil Enemies of Freedom and US Way of Life will continue to hire low-paid workers in poor countries to post manually, with or without help of whatever Selenium/mbasic.facebook.com automation someone will promptly create.
        rhizome 8y ago
        Yes, of course it can still be done manually, but that introduces magnitudes more friction to their operations. It's no longer "post once, publish everywhere" as far as FB is concerned.

jpatokal 8y ago

This includes most blog integrations, eg. being able to configure Wordpress to post a plug on your personal FB when you write something in your blog.

AndrewDucker 8y ago
Yup. I had DlvrIt posting my blog posts to Facebook, and now that doesn't work.
toomuchtodo 8y ago
Good! This means more open distribution methods (email) will be given priority again. I don't want Facebook, nor Twitter. Just take my email address and send me your content, or offer an RSS feed. EDIT: Anyone know if this kills Buffer and other social feed managers?
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  Good - if you don't like/use Facebook. For people who like/use it (and there are many), this is a very sad day.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    What the walled garden giveth, it taketh away. Build on someone's platform? Depend on it exclusively? Gonna have a bad time. You would think folks would learn by now.
    - ConceptJunkie 8y ago
      The real problem is that if 80% of your audience is in the walled garden, and no more than 10% of your audience is on any one of the many other alternatives, you're kind of stuck if you want to reach as many of them as possible easily.
      - toomuchtodo 8y ago
        It’s not your audience; it’s Facebook’s audience. You’ve just been granted the temporary privilege of access to them with no further guarantees.
  - SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
    Presumably people wanting to post links to their personal blog can still open up Facebook in a new tab and Ctrl-V the link in themselves, which will take them all of about 10 seconds. Seems a small price to pay if it cuts down the ridiculous amount of botspam on the platform.
    - TeMPOraL 8y ago
      This can - and is - used to argue against anything that enables users to do more. This thinking is part of the reason why computing for regular people has only fraction of the utility it could have.
      - ConceptJunkie 8y ago
        Yes. Following that idea to its logical conclusion would mean getting rid of computers entirely.
  - mindcrime 8y ago
    For people who like/use it (and there are many), this is a very sad day. Only temporarily. Once folks move off of Facebook and onto something better, they'll realize that this was a Good Thing overall.
- adenner 8y ago
  Yes, this kills buffer's ability to post to profiles, however pages and groups are still allowed. https://faq.buffer.com/article/985-publish-facebook-api-changes https://faq.buffer.com/article/985-publish-facebook-api-chan...
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  "This means more open distribution methods (email) will be given priority again." While that would be nice, I'm not holding my breath.
gm-conspiracy 8y ago
Yes, this was part of their "security" change after the Cambridge Analytica debacle. Although, any site using their JS API can still get your name, email and a unique ID, posting is now restricted via a FB modal or pop-up (which is blocked by more recent browsers). I think this happened in May/June of this year, IIRC.
- idoh 8y ago
  The change went live on August 1, where they deprecated the "publish_actions" permission.
  - gm-conspiracy 8y ago
    They stopped new app approval for awhile, prior to the official deprecation announcement.

dao- 8y ago

Except for Instagram posts, presumably?

AndrewDucker 8y ago
Yup, Instagram still works.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- whoisthisfor 8y ago
  Maybe the EU will slap them with a fine.
- brownkonas 8y ago
  This seems like this will trigger anti-trust proceedings.
  - bena 8y ago
    How so? Facebook is owned by Facebook. Facebook is simply not allowing other services to post on a user's behalf. Those other services still exist, Facebook is not a public good, etc.
    - bobthepanda 8y ago
      Google Shopping was fined over less: https://www.tnooz.com/article/google-shopping-decision-sets-precedent-which-could-decide-future-of-google-flights/ https://www.tnooz.com/article/google-shopping-decision-sets-... Large companies, particularly in the EU, are not allowed to throw their weight around to privilege their own services and apps.
      - bena 8y ago
        That's not "less". That's way more. Google prioritizing their offerings over other vendors on a search they control is far different than "Can't post on Facebook from Twitter". Google has put itself forward as a fairly agnostic search. No one signs up to be indexed by Google. It works more like a common good. So when Google starts offering a service, then puts its own offerings before others in its search. That's dirty pool. But that's not what's happening here. Facebook is a platform to connect with other people who are also on Facebook. It doesn't purport to be a central hub for anything but Facebook. It's just not allowing Twitter (and others) to post on users' behalf.

mrweasel 8y ago

I wonder what the reasoning behind this is. It seems that it would reduce the amount of content on Facebook. Perhaps the thought is that people will go and post directly to Facebook instead? Or it could be a way of reducing noice/spam.

ghaff 8y ago
Apparently it's part of further locking down their API (https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/01/psa-cross-posting-tweets-to-facebook-no-longer-works-as-of-today/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/01/psa-cross-posting-tweets-t...) so that random apps that have been given permission to post by default can no longer do so. The way I read it, people who deliberately want to cross-post tweets are essentially collateral damage.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  Why couldn't they blanket-deauth all Facebook apps (or maybe just ones authed before this year, or sth.) instead? People would fix the apps they still use. And really, publishing apps on FB is not a real problem; apps exfiltrating data is.
  - ceejayoz 8y ago
    Apps exfiltrating is one problem. Bots posing as real people to rile up racial/political/etc. tensions is another, and this approach helps a bit there.
    - TeMPOraL 8y ago
      This won't help much. Evil Enemies of Freedom and US Way of Life will continue to hire low-paid workers in poor countries to post manually, with or without help of whatever Selenium/mbasic.facebook.com automation someone will promptly create.
      - rhizome 8y ago
        Yes, of course it can still be done manually, but that introduces magnitudes more friction to their operations. It's no longer "post once, publish everywhere" as far as FB is concerned.