It works, today, in a direct form . Facebook becomes officially what was already informally for some time: a new kiosk, a digital kiosk attended by 1.4 billion people. Potential readers, potential customers. From today explains in detail his colleague Davide Casati, 5 newspapers (9 become with the addition of the European ones) begin to publish their “pieces” directly on Facebook. No link, it seems that they cost an average wait of 8/2 of the mobile: the journalistic content are there, on the platform of Palo Alto, in the version for smartphones. At the rate of flow 0.8 seconds. In fact the service is called Instant Articles. And it is a sort of passage, or so it seems. Because, as he writes the New York Times, taken by all as the leader and reference of the operation, “the social network capture the attention of surfers from phone service like no other.” And the future (this) information is on smartphones.
Yet the operation is viewed by the world of publishing with an attitude mixture of desire and fear . Two words not chosen at random but caught directly from the article that the NYT has the operation. The item of a traditional muzzle, the more traditional and the reference, which is a boxing match inside which sees a succession of hooks in favor of the transaction and direct that put on notice of the real opportunity of this. In the background is the idea of an increasingly dim view of Facebook, which many surfers are likely to be confused with the Internet itself. Or rather, the Web, that Wired just gave up for dead already 5 years ago.
News organizations have for decades lived a life (relatively) quiet . Then everything changed in recent years, with Facebook in fact, a great opportunity for small publishers, it is tempting to be taken, however, with the pliers for large. “Publishers have no choice but to cooperate with Facebook,” writes the NYT always putting words in the mouth of Vivian Schiller, former manager right in the New York Times. “Readers are there, it is evidence that we can not ignore.” Yet there is fear of losing control, of losing their brand. “The nine publishing companies have decided to sign the agreement despite concerns that this participation may undermine the basis of their business.”
Why Facebook based visibility of the contents of an algorithm, like Google for the Web . An algorithm that has made such a climb, and then the descent, of companies like Zynga and its games on the social platform. An algorithm that changes constantly, several times a week, and that a year ago he has made the downgrade of viral content (kittens) in favor of the content of value, and that a month ago has changed again to give greater visibility to content posted by our “real friends”. These changes can mean fortune or tragedy depending on where orient Facebook users. For this the end of the article the New York Times calls Instant Articles “an experiment” which must be “cautious”.
Much more “secular” is instead the approach to the program of Facebook by BuzzFeed , a young head born in 2006 but only in 2011 in fact produces journalistic content. The prime example of the site is carried out in the video produced by BuzzFeed: “Currently only 5% of our videos are seen on our site.” The rest is consumed on other platforms, Facebook first course. “In an ideal world, we are indifferent as to which are the platforms on which our readers consume our content.” According to BuzzFeed, the important thing in this ideal world where the contents lose their head and apply for themselves, is to be guaranteed three basic values. In the new distribution experience it is critical that: 1) is a good experience for the users; 2) We can have visibility on the data and the characteristics of what they see our readers; 3) our company can build on this big business.
The agreement with Facebook currently provides all this.
No comments:
Post a Comment