"A pregnant unwed mother can’t use Facebook alone to notify the father about the baby before putting the child up for adoption, Oklahoma’s highest civil court has ruled."
Facebook! People use it a lot; therefore, publishers want to be a part of it. Everyone wants to know: How can our publication succeed in this strange new media landscape? How can we get Facebook users to come to our site, instead of all the other sites? Today, in a post called "How to Drive Referrals to your Digital Properties"—wait, no, it's just called "Drive Referrals to your Digital Properties"—Facebook posted some advice:
First, the basics:
1. Post frequently 2. Share links, photos, and a variety of content
Then, go native. Be social!
3. Upload videos to Facebook with a call to action 4. Create content with [...]
The first mainstream story about the now-notorious Facebook "psychology experiment" study was cautious, even sober. "Even online, emotions can be contagious," New Scientist's headline said. It maintained its tone: [Facebook] manipulated which posts showed up on the news feeds of more than 600,000 Facebook users. For one week, some users saw fewer posts with negative emotional words than usual, while others saw fewer posts with positive ones. …
People were more likely to use positive words in Facebook posts if they had been exposed to fewer negative posts throughout the week, and vice versa. The effect was significant, though modest.
This story was doomed, in the internet sense, from [...]
The internet is vast and wild and unknowable and full of potential, unless you are a website. If you are a website, you depend on traffic. And if you depend on traffic, you know that it comes from just a few different places. Facebook is a big one, and for many sites the biggest. Pinterest is enormous, staggeringly so, for sites that overlap with Pinterest's audience. LinkedIn sends a lot of people if you write about business or self-help; Twitter sends a very modest and modestly valuable stream of people to stories about the news. In other words, in 2014, normal people read the internet mostly on their phones, [...]
Nothing will replace the “like” button on our Facebook pages. But does it say enough? Even with the fine suggestion from Facebook engineers of a “sympathize” button, we’re still handcuffed to a simple abstraction—“like”—when what we really mean is so much more specific.
• This post has my name on it.
• Historically I’ve “liked” stuff like this.
• Don’t dislike.
• Great photo of you! (Shitty photo of me!)
• Ha ha ha!—I think I understand.
• A lot of my friends have “liked” this.
• Inside joke?
• Missing word?
• LOL’d… didn’t quiiite ROTFL.
• Think you’re attractive. [...]
TWC goes to Comcast. This chart helps put it in to perspective. pic.twitter.com/XmlAZvOE3Y
— James Gross (@James_Gross) February 13, 2014
That chart above went around a bit last night, with the news of the purchase of Time Warner by Comcast for $45.2 billion. It compares the "market value" of LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook and Google v. the "market value" of CBS, Viacom, Disney, Comcast and Time Warner Cable. You know, the new establishment v. those stupid old dinosaurs. Hmm, how else could we compare these companies?
Oh right, how about by that crazy out-of-fashion metric: by the money they make? I made you a chart! Here's that [...]