5 ms·

I'm no Facebook fan, but doesn't it feel like there is a coordinated media effort to destroy Facebook? It's quite strange. Outside of WSJ, Google seems to get a

I'm no Facebook fan, but doesn't it feel like there is a coordinated media effort to destroy Facebook? It's quite strange. Outside of WSJ, Google seems to get away with it almost the same things Facebook is doing. I'm not sure what to make of it.

Permit 8y ago
FWIW A lot of these media organizations derive a lot of their inbound traffic from Facebook. Last January[1] Facebook changed how the news feed algorithm worked. My understanding is that this severely impacted the traffic to many of these media outlets as they no longer showed up as frequently on people's news feed. For example, from a site for content marketing[2]: >Since Mark Zuckerberg’s 2018 announcement that the Facebook algorithm will prioritize “meaningful interactions” from friends and family over content from brands, it has become trickier than ever to ensure your organic content gets the screen time it deserves. [1] https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/01/news-feed-fyi-bringing-people-closer-together/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/01/news-feed-fyi-bringing-... [2] https://blog.hootsuite.com/facebook-algorithm/ https://blog.hootsuite.com/facebook-algorithm/
bogomipz 8y ago
Oh the tiresome conspiracy theory. Right, editors from different media publications are "coordinating." They are actively strategizing and communicating with one another in order to "destroy" one of the most powerful companies in the world. Because there's zero possibility that given involvement of FB in everything from violence in Myanmar, Philippines and Sri Lank to fake political ads in US elections, FB's further encroachment on our lives is an actual topical interest story? Yes "quite strange."
- partiallypro 8y ago
  Except those had been going on for years, and now all of a sudden, after Facebook changes their algorithm, journalists notice that Facebook has a problem.
  - tivert 8y ago
    > Except those had been going on for years, and now all of a sudden, after Facebook changes their algorithm, journalists notice that Facebook has a problem. I think the 2016 presidential election has a lot more to do with the increased scrutiny. It brought both the media's direct attention and motivated many insiders to make public criticisms of Facebook, which fuels coverage.
    - partiallypro 8y ago
      The question also is, had Hillary won, would there have even been much increased scrutiny from that? Or would the story have merely faded away.
      - bogomipz 8y ago
        That's a total strawman but the answer is yes. Even before the "Russia story" broke, the story of Brad Parscale the Digital Director of the Trump Campaign and how FB embedded employees with him was a national news story. It was covered on 60 Minutes: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-embeds-russia-and-the-trump-campaigns-secret-weapon-60-minutes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-embeds-russia-and-the-... And even before that back in 2012 the Atlantic did a piece on the emerging role of FB in politics entitled: "Did Facebook Give Democrats the Upper Hand?" https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/11/did-facebook-give-democrats-the-upper-hand/264937/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/11/did-f...
        partiallypro 8y ago
        And...the 2012 article doesn't actually put Facebook under a critical microscope like it is today. In fact, at the time it was viewed and covered as political genius. So, you sort of proved my point. Examples: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campaigns-digital-masterminds-cash-in.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campai... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/17/obama-campaign-digital-team https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/17/obama-campaign... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/14/obama-digital-campaigning-dashboard https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/14/obama-digital-...
- drak0n1c 8y ago
  There have been repeated cases of journalists from different media publications relying on shared email lists and private "Hacker News" style forums as a starting point for coming up with stories and angles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList Of course such practices don't mean there's some kind of organized conspiracy, but it could plausibly explain why the news cycle is flooded with derivative material and many headlines share the same keywords. Here are a variety of outlets using the same unusual adjective "Dark" in non-editorial news headlines covering the same event: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/21/full-text-donald-trumps-prepared-remarks-accepting-the-republican-nomination/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/21/fu... https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/donald-trumps-dark-dark-convention-speech https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/donald-trumps-da... https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000004545647/trumps-speech-casts-us-in-dark-light.html https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000004545647/tr... https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/22/us/politics/donald-trump-rnc-speech.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/22/us/politics/donald-trump-... https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/07/22/a_dark_speech_for_a_dark_time_131288.html https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/07/22/a_dark... https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/donald-trump-rnc-speech https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/donald-trump-rnc-spe... https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/22/donald-trump-paints-dark-vision-of-america-in-authoritarian-conv/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/22/donald-trump-pai... https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-donald-trump-convention-speech-fact-check-20160721-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-... https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/melania-trump-brings-light-touch-dark-opening-night-gop-convention-n612131 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/melania-trump... https://www.thenation.com/article/donald-trumps-angry-dark-speech-caps-off-a-disaster-rnc/ https://www.thenation.com/article/donald-trumps-angry-dark-s... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-gop-convention-speech/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-gop-convention-spe... https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/07/stephen-milller-wrote-donald-trump-s-dark-resentful-speech.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/07/stephen-milller-... https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/07/21/republican-convention-in-dark-speech-donald-trump-pledges-to-restore-order/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/07/21/republican-convention...
Yhippa 8y ago
I can live without Facebook. I can't live without Google.
- partiallypro 8y ago
  That's irrelevant to journalistic standards.
- EForEndeavour 8y ago
  I think you'd find a way to "live" (i.e., survive in the modern world) if Google disappeared. Their dominance makes it extremely difficult to avoid using their products and services, but it's possible.
- ummonk 8y ago
  Isn’t that what makes Google more dangerous?
sangnoir 8y ago
Reporting on terrible things doesn't need a conspiracy. Can you imagine someone saying "I'm no Ebola fan, but doesn't it feel..."
- partiallypro 8y ago
  Except they don't report on Google. That would be like reporting on Ebola as a #1 killer, but then ignoring the Opioid crisis.
  - tivert 8y ago
    Facebook is only company that operates social networks that deeply penetrate the US population. Google doesn't have any successful social networks. Twitter isn't used heavily by typical people, and neither is Snapchat or Reddit.
    - partiallypro 8y ago
      How are the problems facing Facebook "social network" specific? I don't believe they are, and I don't think many if any experts on the matter do either.
    - ipsum2 8y ago
      Youtube (owned by Google) is a giant social network that probably has more users than Snapchat, Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook combined. Users can make video posts that others can comment on and share. Youtube also has rolled out Stories, which is similar to Instagram and Snapchat.
      - tivert 8y ago
        Personally, I don't put Youtube in the social network category because most of its users are passive consumers. I think social networks as systems that explicitly model social connections and whose users have a relatively high ratio of send-actions to receive-actions. That said, Youtube does have many of the same social problems as Facebook (e.g. use as a cheap and effective channel for pushing disinformation, cultivating hyperpartisan filter bubbles, etc.).

Permit 8y ago

FWIW A lot of these media organizations derive a lot of their inbound traffic from Facebook. Last January[1] Facebook changed how the news feed algorithm worked. My understanding is that this severely impacted the traffic to many of these media outlets as they no longer showed up as frequently on people's news feed. For example, from a site for content marketing[2]: >Since Mark Zuckerberg’s 2018 announcement that the Facebook algorithm will prioritize “meaningful interactions” from friends and family over content from brands, it has become trickier than ever to ensure your organic content gets the screen time it deserves. [1] https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/01/news-feed-fyi-bringing-people-closer-together/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/01/news-feed-fyi-bringing-... [2] https://blog.hootsuite.com/facebook-algorithm/ https://blog.hootsuite.com/facebook-algorithm/

bogomipz 8y ago

Oh the tiresome conspiracy theory. Right, editors from different media publications are "coordinating." They are actively strategizing and communicating with one another in order to "destroy" one of the most powerful companies in the world. Because there's zero possibility that given involvement of FB in everything from violence in Myanmar, Philippines and Sri Lank to fake political ads in US elections, FB's further encroachment on our lives is an actual topical interest story? Yes "quite strange."

partiallypro 8y ago
Except those had been going on for years, and now all of a sudden, after Facebook changes their algorithm, journalists notice that Facebook has a problem.
- tivert 8y ago
  > Except those had been going on for years, and now all of a sudden, after Facebook changes their algorithm, journalists notice that Facebook has a problem. I think the 2016 presidential election has a lot more to do with the increased scrutiny. It brought both the media's direct attention and motivated many insiders to make public criticisms of Facebook, which fuels coverage.
  - partiallypro 8y ago
    The question also is, had Hillary won, would there have even been much increased scrutiny from that? Or would the story have merely faded away.
    - bogomipz 8y ago
      That's a total strawman but the answer is yes. Even before the "Russia story" broke, the story of Brad Parscale the Digital Director of the Trump Campaign and how FB embedded employees with him was a national news story. It was covered on 60 Minutes: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-embeds-russia-and-the-trump-campaigns-secret-weapon-60-minutes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-embeds-russia-and-the-... And even before that back in 2012 the Atlantic did a piece on the emerging role of FB in politics entitled: "Did Facebook Give Democrats the Upper Hand?" https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/11/did-facebook-give-democrats-the-upper-hand/264937/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/11/did-f...
      - partiallypro 8y ago
        And...the 2012 article doesn't actually put Facebook under a critical microscope like it is today. In fact, at the time it was viewed and covered as political genius. So, you sort of proved my point. Examples: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campaigns-digital-masterminds-cash-in.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campai... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/17/obama-campaign-digital-team https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/17/obama-campaign... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/14/obama-digital-campaigning-dashboard https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/14/obama-digital-...
drak0n1c 8y ago
There have been repeated cases of journalists from different media publications relying on shared email lists and private "Hacker News" style forums as a starting point for coming up with stories and angles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList Of course such practices don't mean there's some kind of organized conspiracy, but it could plausibly explain why the news cycle is flooded with derivative material and many headlines share the same keywords. Here are a variety of outlets using the same unusual adjective "Dark" in non-editorial news headlines covering the same event: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/21/full-text-donald-trumps-prepared-remarks-accepting-the-republican-nomination/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/21/fu... https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/donald-trumps-dark-dark-convention-speech https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/donald-trumps-da... https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000004545647/trumps-speech-casts-us-in-dark-light.html https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000004545647/tr... https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/22/us/politics/donald-trump-rnc-speech.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/22/us/politics/donald-trump-... https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/07/22/a_dark_speech_for_a_dark_time_131288.html https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/07/22/a_dark... https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/donald-trump-rnc-speech https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/donald-trump-rnc-spe... https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/22/donald-trump-paints-dark-vision-of-america-in-authoritarian-conv/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/22/donald-trump-pai... https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-donald-trump-convention-speech-fact-check-20160721-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-... https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/melania-trump-brings-light-touch-dark-opening-night-gop-convention-n612131 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/melania-trump... https://www.thenation.com/article/donald-trumps-angry-dark-speech-caps-off-a-disaster-rnc/ https://www.thenation.com/article/donald-trumps-angry-dark-s... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-gop-convention-speech/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-gop-convention-spe... https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/07/stephen-milller-wrote-donald-trump-s-dark-resentful-speech.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/07/stephen-milller-... https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/07/21/republican-convention-in-dark-speech-donald-trump-pledges-to-restore-order/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/07/21/republican-convention...

Yhippa 8y ago

I can live without Facebook. I can't live without Google.

partiallypro 8y ago
That's irrelevant to journalistic standards.
EForEndeavour 8y ago
I think you'd find a way to "live" (i.e., survive in the modern world) if Google disappeared. Their dominance makes it extremely difficult to avoid using their products and services, but it's possible.
ummonk 8y ago
Isn’t that what makes Google more dangerous?

sangnoir 8y ago

Reporting on terrible things doesn't need a conspiracy. Can you imagine someone saying "I'm no Ebola fan, but doesn't it feel..."

partiallypro 8y ago
Except they don't report on Google. That would be like reporting on Ebola as a #1 killer, but then ignoring the Opioid crisis.
- tivert 8y ago
  Facebook is only company that operates social networks that deeply penetrate the US population. Google doesn't have any successful social networks. Twitter isn't used heavily by typical people, and neither is Snapchat or Reddit.
  - partiallypro 8y ago
    How are the problems facing Facebook "social network" specific? I don't believe they are, and I don't think many if any experts on the matter do either.
  - ipsum2 8y ago
    Youtube (owned by Google) is a giant social network that probably has more users than Snapchat, Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook combined. Users can make video posts that others can comment on and share. Youtube also has rolled out Stories, which is similar to Instagram and Snapchat.
    - tivert 8y ago
      Personally, I don't put Youtube in the social network category because most of its users are passive consumers. I think social networks as systems that explicitly model social connections and whose users have a relatively high ratio of send-actions to receive-actions. That said, Youtube does have many of the same social problems as Facebook (e.g. use as a cheap and effective channel for pushing disinformation, cultivating hyperpartisan filter bubbles, etc.).