SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Big news outlets stupidly sold their soul to Facebook. Desperate for the referral traffic Facebook dangled, they spent the past few years jumping through its hoops only to be cut out of the equation. Instead of developing an owned audience of homepage visitors and newsletter subscribers, they let Facebook brainwash readers into thinking it was their source of information.
Now Facebook is pushing into local news, but publishers should be wary of making the same crooked deal. It might provide more exposure and traffic for smaller outlets today, but it could teach users they only need to visit Facebook for local news in the future. Here's how Facebook retrained us over the past 12 years to drain the dollars out of news.
Source : How Facebook stole the news business
(Score: 3, Interesting) by requerdanos on Monday February 05 2018, @01:05AM (7 children)
The only "news" I get from Facebook is random happenings from the town where I was born, posted by people who live there.
Any other contact with "Facebook News" that I have basically involves me posting comments on "News Stores" saying things like This was demonstrated to be a hoax 20 years ago, as 5 seconds of googling would have told you (see following link). Please stop posting this junk; you are making the world a worse place."
Although I don't really believe what TFA/TFA seem to be saying, I do understand that the implication seems to be that actual grown adults smart enough to log onto a website choose Facebook as a place to inform their worldview by receiving their news there (because it's convenient?).
Isn't that kind of like getting your drinking water from the toilets? Sure, I have seen some really nice people go towards the toilet, but that doesn't mean you want them as a source of anything. If "Facebook" really "Stole the News Business," then Idiocracy may very well be an insightful, avant-garde documentary.
(Score: 4, Touché) by c0lo on Monday February 05 2018, @01:18AM (2 children)
FTFY.
Welcome back to reality, I hope you had a good hibernation time for the last 7-10 years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 05 2018, @02:20AM
The man removed his pants and undies, thereby revealing the innermost reaches of his rectum to his childlike audience. He was an anal willow.
"I'm not carded again!" he screeched.
The very next day, the corpse of a naked woman was discovered on a nearby sidewalk.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by isostatic on Monday February 05 2018, @08:23AM
Idiocracy is too optimistic to be a documentary
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Apparition on Monday February 05 2018, @01:21AM (1 child)
There's been studies shown that most people under the age of 35 get their news from Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram [americanpressinstitute.org].
You know, that sounds terrible, and it is. But the older generations mostly get their news from television, and is that really any better?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by requerdanos on Monday February 05 2018, @01:58AM
Well, I'd argue that the TV model makes it easier to keep up with considering the source of your news, and considering its reliability.
The typical evening TV-News-Watching session goes watch local news, then watch Network News. Fill-in from your favorite news network.
So, it might go:
Story - Source
#1 - Channel 3
#2 - Channel 3
#3 - Channel 3
#4 - Channel 3
#5 - Channel 3
#6 - National Network X
#7 - National Network X
#8 - National Network X
#9 - National Network X
#10 - National Network X
#11 - Favorite News Channel Y
#12 - Favorite News Channel Y
So twelve stories, only three editorial sources, and all of those editorial sources, while not infallible, are still doing better than 50% and when they do get it wrong, the others cry about it and name them specifically.
Contrast with:
Story - Source
#1 - Random source, not sure what it was, via facebook
#2 - Different Random source, not sure what it was, via facebook
#3 - Another Different Random source, not sure what it was, via facebook
#4 - Still Another Random source, not sure what it was, via twitter, reposted via facebook
#5 - buzzkill-dot-com totally legit news division, via facebook
#6 - Totally reliable random minor partisan political website, via facebook
#7-99 - Rinse and repeat.
Tough to even keep up with what the sources are, let alone consider their reputations, unless you actually look to see what source each story comes from and keep score.
In talking with people who seem to get their news that way, when I ask a question about what was the source of a particular story, I tend to get "I dunno, it was, you know, under the news section and stuff, you know, where the little things are?" at best, and all too often it's just a blank stare and accusation that I don't know how Facebook even works if I would have to ask.
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday February 05 2018, @01:41AM
Three words: Tide Pod Challenge
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Funny) by tibman on Monday February 05 2018, @05:30AM
please order corn
https://www.reddit.com/r/oldpeoplefacebook/comments/20eieb/not_sure_whats_going_on_here/ [reddit.com]
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.