Facebook’s news ban – what was that all about?

Facebook-news-ban
Graph supplied by Chartbeats/NiemanLab

Nothing better demonstrates the irrelevancy of  Facebook’s news ban than this tweet from elder statesman Everald Compton.

“My friends in Parliament tell me that meeting between #CraigKelly and #Barnaby was to create new #conservative party with Barnaby as leader.

They will be joined by Christensen and Canavan and sit on the cross benches. #Morrison will lead minority government. Happy Days.”

Compton, who many would know through his long-running blog, Everald at Large, posted the 45-word tweet at 5.30 on Tuesday. An enterprising friend took a screenshot and emailed it to me, which is one of the myriad ways enterprising people circumnavigated Facebook’s too-much too-soon decision to ban the sharing of ‘news’.

Twitter consumers would simply ‘retweet’ so their 654 followers will see Everald’s tweet too. Just so you know, the usual Facebook sharing route would be for a friend to ‘retweet’ on Twitter and, subject to your own Facebook settings, share it as a post. Said friends would then re-share (on Facebook or elsewhere). But as you know, that was briefly not possible, until this morning.

The alternative, copying a news link from a publisher and emailing it to a few friends, is a poor substitute for assuming that your 654 friends will read long articles like Ross Garnaut’s theory of ‘voluntary unemployment’. (by which he means a deliberate government policy of maintaining an unemployment rate, not another term for ‘dole bludgers’. Ed)

While Facebook today re-instated news sharing on its platform, as it has promised, during its week-long hiatus, Facebook regressed to a state where every second post was either an ad (sponsored), an attempt by zealots to bypass the news sharing ban (cut and paste and share) , or paid ads from conventional news outlets. The latter usually said something like ‘If you are looking for (our) news here, you won’t find it – go to our website or download our app.”

I briefly wondered if conventional media paid Facebook for these ads or whether it was some sort of good faith gesture. Unlikely, given the speed with which Facebook unleashed its mysterious algorithms; which not only shut off news sharing, but inadvertently shut off access to government websites, hospitals, emergency services, charities and even humble not-for-profit blogs.

Everald Compton’s tweet also demonstrates the gulf between the way people used to consume and disseminate information and what they do now.

In the not so long ago world of journalism, a person privy to such intel would have quietly picked up the phone and dialled the number of their pet journo (“mate, you didn’t hear it from me”).

The immediacy (and brevity) of Twitter allows someone with Compton’s media skills to distribute this hot rumour to the world in general in a heartbeart.

Is it accurate and does it really matter?

Craig Kelly’s sudden resignation from the Liberal Party to sit on the cross-bench raises all manner of scenarios. He will be wooed by the National Party and others on the fringes of politics and the suggestion he may buddy up with Barnaby Joyce, Matt Canavan and George Christensen is wholly on the cards.

So far the ‘traditional media’ is having nowt to say about the possibilities of a new (some have said ‘Trumpian’), political party. Compton’s view on the matter would seem to be that whatever happens, Prime Minister Morrison will lead a minority government. He will have no option but to do deals to get legislation across the line.

Facebook’s decision on February 18 to ban news sharing on its platform was triggered by mooted legislation that would force Facebook to pay media companies for sharing their news content. While the legislation has been amended in the Senate, the draft legislation now has to go back to Parliament. But deals have clearly been done.

The business risk to Facebook was a potential loss of custom from people who decide to source their news elsewhere. The clearer risk to publishers is the quantum drop off in traffic to their news sites.

According to Harvard University’s NiemanLab (and Chartbeat), the ban sent the hourly rate of Facebook traffic to news sites from within Australia tumbling. Chartbeat’s analysis concluded that when Facebook traffic dropped off, overall Australian traffic did not shift to other platforms.

This drop has been seen most dramatically in traffic to Australian sites from readers outside of Australia: Because that readership was so driven by Facebook, overall this outside-Australia traffic has fallen day-over-day by over 20% (or more)”

NiemanLab had speculated that if Facebook’s news ban were to continue, dedicated news consumers might adapt in ways that are positive for news publishers. For example, they might visit a publisher’s website more often, or sign up for a daily newsletter.

NiemanLab’s Joshua Benton concluded: “Casual reader of news on Facebook and that’s most users, given that news stories make up only about 4% of the typical News Feed, might just skip news entirely.”

Australian economist and blogger John Quiggin says the real problem is advertising. Facebook and Google are able to offer advertisers much better targeting of ads than either news organisations or traditional broadcasters.

Much of the content used to make this targeting work is links to content prepared by traditional news organisations,” Quiggin wrote in The Conversation, a not-for-profit news portal.

The entire debate about who benefits most — the organisations that do the linking or the organisations that are linked to — misses the point.

We have always put up with advertising in order to get the information produced by news organisations.

Now the advertising revenue is flowing to Google and Facebook, and we have no model for funding news media in the future.”  Quiggin, who is Professor of the School of Economics at the University of Queensland, suggests the solution may be direct public funding, “perhaps financed by a tax on advertising.

Quiggin notes that his own blog, www.johnquiggin.com, had been affected by the ban, even though it carries no advertising and does not seek payment from Facebook. WordPress automatically posts this weekly missive to Bobwords, my blog page on Facebook. But when I tried to share it to my personal page last Friday, I got the same message as when trying to share Prof. Quiggin’s post yesterday afternoon:

In response to Australian government legislation, Facebook restricts the posting of news links and all posts from news Pages in Australia. Globally, the posting and sharing of news links from Australian publications is restricted. 

Now hang on a minute, didn’t Facebook say (on Tuesday) it would re-instate news links? Like the Queen Mary, it took a long time to turn around.

If you have not already done so, sign up for The Conversation’s (free) newsletter; stories written by academics and curated by journalists. They need us now more than ever.

 

 

 

 

Down the rabbit hole, looking for trouble

down-the-rabbit-hole
Image by Lee J Haywood cc https://flic.kr/p/7wJQch

The phrase ‘going down the rabbit hole’ could well apply to my activities earlier this week, as I set out to research ‘alternative’ social media networks including those adopted by the right wing.

Before I disappeared down the burrow, I had some idea what I would encounter, having last year researched 4Chan and 8Chan.

My research was thwarted right at the start by Amazon’s reported move to ban Parler from its web-hosting network.

Apple and Google have also removed the Parler App from its app stores. Not surprisingly, www.parler.com has been off-line since Monday.

Parler (pronounced par-lay), at last count had 15 million members, including a significant number of Trump supporters. Parler has been cited as the source of posts inciting violence before last week’s storming of Washington’s Capitol Building. Amazon terminated the app’s internet access at the weekend, having previously warned the social media operator about breaching its moderation rules (deciding which comments to let through).

While Parler went off-line, looking for another web host, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg took to his own forum to explain why Trump has been denied access. Twitter had already blocked Mr Trump’s account after earlier labelling some of his tweets as disputed or false claims.

Amazon (and Parler) have not made official comments about the ban, not surprising given the potential for litigation. This piece by the Washington Post (owned, as the article declares, by Amazon owner Jeff Bezos), should suffice as a summary.

The fallout from last week’s rioting at the Capitol Building includes internet giants Facebook and Twitter banning soon to be ex-President Trump from commenting. This could be construed to mean they figure the riots happened because Trump encouraged it (and social media gave the angry mob a place to vent, plan, organise and schedule).

Authorities seemed slow to lay arrest and lay charges, (the FBI today says more than 100 arrested). Those charged  include those accused of bringing bombs and weapons into the building. Others, whose faces were caught on video, have so far escaped the link between that and their actual identities. If it had been in CCTV-dominated London, they’d all be nicked by now.

On Tuesday, US authorities announced new arrests and charges including Jacob Anthony Chansley, also known as Jake Angeli. They also charged Derrick Evans, a recently-elected member of the West Virginia House of Delegates. The US Attorney’s office said Mr Evans was identified on a video, shouting as he crossed the threshold into the Capitol, “We’re in, we’re in! Derrick Evans is in the Capitol!

The pair and one other man were charged in Federal Court in connection with the violent incursion into the Capitol.

Chansley, the most identifiable of those captured on video or security cameras was hard to miss, with his red white and blue face paint, tattooed chest, horned helmet and bearskin toupee.

He was charged with “knowingly entering or remaining in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority, and with violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds.”

On Tuesday I clicked ‘like’ on multiple Facebook posts condemning Australia’s acting Prime Minister Michael McCormack for seemingly taking ex-president Trump’s side over the Twitter ban. The debate, free speech vs consequences. rumbles on.

McCormack’s attempts to compare the riots with last year’s Black Lives Matter protests against racial injustice were described by Amnesty International as “deeply offensive.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who is on leave, last week condemned the rioters over the “terribly distressing” violence and called for a peaceful transfer of power.

But unlike many other world leaders, he refused to acknowledge Trump’s role in inciting the mob that gate-crashed the US Capitol building.

Just in case you think things like that only happen ‘over there’, there are stridently right-wing politicians in our own parliament saying provocative things. The Guardian reported that government backbencher George Christensen said over the weekend he would push for laws to “stop media platforms from censoring any and all lawful content created by their users.

Further to Parler’s ban, social media posts have appeared claiming that ‘ultra left-wing radicals’ have downloaded Parler profiles aplenty and a mass ‘doxxing’ is feared.

Doxxing in this context means a deliberate dumping of publicly available data with the aim of ‘outing’ people who express strong views on social media. Apparently it (the gleaning), has been going on for some time.

At this point, like my friend Mr Shiraz, who finished his daily rant on Facebook and went outside to prune trees, I turned my mind to substantive issues in Australia.

It seems the combined media coverage of Covid-19 and life in Trumpistan* has pushed Australia’s refugee issues off the news agenda.

Since I recently joined a local refugee support group which aims to help refugees in a positive way, I thought I should play my part.

I started by writing to the Southern Downs Regional Council, asking Mayor Vic Pennisi to join the 168 local governments in Australia who have designated their regions a ‘Refugee Welcome Zone.’

Our near neighbour, Toowoomba Regional Council, declared the city as such back in 2013 – before it was even a ‘thing’.

The Refugee Council of Australia definition of a ‘Refugee Welcome Zone’ is: a Local Government Area which has made a commitment in spirit to welcoming refugees into the community. The aim is to uphold the human rights of refugees, demonstrate compassion for refugees and enhance cultural and religious diversity in the community’.

There’s a bit of a precedent, with participants widespread throughout Australia including the City of Sydney (NSW), Brisbane City Council (Qld), the City of Subiaco (WA), Clarence City Council (Tasmania) and Port Macquarie-Hastings Council (NSW).

There are eight local governments in Queensland who have rolled out the welcome mat for refugees, including Brisbane, Gold Coast, Logan, Townsville, Toowoomba and Noosa Council.

In applying myself to letter writing, I broke the cycle of ‘doom-scrolling’ which is a catch-phrase to describe the act of constantly updating news and social media feeds on one’s mobile phone. They say it makes anxious people grind their teeth at night.

This insidious condition worsens for every day the US inauguration grows closer; for every day we endure live press conferences updating our region’s Covid status.

In what must surely now be recognised as a classic FOMM digression, the phrase ‘Down the Rabbit Hole’ has been nabbed by an enterprising South Australian winemaker.

Down the Rabbit Hole Wines is clever marketing in an industry that seems switched on to it. I should also tell you about a Victorian winemaker whose label is Goodwill Wine. I don’t imbibe, but She Who Does tells me the red is worthy of their loose adaptation of our band name (www.thegoodwills,com).

Brand names aside, ‘going down the rabbit hole’ is defined by dictionary.com as a metaphor for something that transports someone into a wonderfully (or troublingly), surreal state or situation.

I rest my case.

Last week: One of my readers (a beekeeper) chided me for calling the bee disease ‘Fowlbrood’. I’m blaming the spellchecker, as I already knew it was ‘American foulbrood’ or AFB.

*Trumpistan: a term for the parts of the USA which support Donald Trump