Gepostet vor 1 Jahr, 2 Monaten in
Online-Media is a mess! Hooray!
Hier die Links zu Adblock-Kriegen und verzweifelten Journalisten am Freitag den 13., diesmal extra businessblutig:
Im Adblock-Krieg kam's neulich zu Friedensverhandlungen: AdBlock Plus Hosted a ‘Camp David’ to Help End the AdBlock Wars: „AdBlock Plus presented attendees with the idea that users would be able to help them define what constituted an 'intrusive' ad, and ads deemed intrusive would not run. Acceptable Ads has already barred a lot of annoying ads, but this new development gives users more input. But mainly, AdBlock Plus wanted 'unvarnished advice on how we should formulate the new Acceptable Ads Committee, which will take over the Acceptable Ads initiative sometime next year.' The move to turn leadership of Acceptable Ads to a board outside of Eyeo, the maker of AdBlock Plus, has been controversial.“
Zu Adblocking sollte man die Tage ebenfalls den hier lesen: Why It’s OK to Block Ads, der Artikel spricht eine Menge Punkte an und geht dankenswerterweise an den Kern des Problems, die Aufmerksamkeitsökonomie und warum genau sie es ist, die letztlich den nervigen Clickbait-Scheiß verursacht. Er hat aber auch keine Lösung für werbefinanzierte Sites, die dieses Spiel nicht mitspielen.
Also, an actually useful Adblocker: Meet Ad Replacer, a new ad blocker that switches out ads with content.
Wenn VR zuerst von Werbefuzzis adaptiert wird und nicht von der Porno-Industrie, dann wird das sicher ein durchschlagender Erfolg: Facebook Is Now Selling Virtual Reality-Like Video Ads: „Facebook will start publishing more 360-degree video content into your News Feed — and it’s also going to start including 360-degree video ads. You don’t need a virtual reality headset to watch these videos, but they simulate what it’s like to look anywhere in a scene.“
John Hermann von The Awl über Tech Is Eating Media. Now What?: „I’ve been arguing for some time now that online media companies — and in particular news operations — are, in some cases intentionally but in most cases not, losing a degree of ownership over their audiences. On one hand, the number of people they reach is potentially greater than ever; on the other, they’re reaching these people, as well as much of their old audience, through much larger third parties. That’s just at the level of audience — on the other side of their offices, advertising staff is coming to terms with just how directly their industry’s business model is coming into competition with that of their new, and much larger, partners. It’s not just a major change. It’s a total change of context.“
Quartz: Death by a thousand likes: How Facebook and Twitter are killing the open web: „The answer is simple, but it isn’t easy. We need to stop pretending that content is free. Publications need to ask readers to pay for their content directly, and readers need to be willing to give up money, as opposed to their privacy and attention. This means that publications will have to abandon the rapid-growth business models driven by display ads, which have driven them to rely on Facebook for millions of pageviews a month.“
The Intersect über die Facebook-Happiness-Studie: What a viral study about the harms of Facebook gets wrong: „The bottom line here is that you get out of Facebook what you put into it, much like anything else in life. (The Internet is not immune from the usual laws of common sense — surprise!)“
Slack als Content-Lieferant: How Storyful is turning Slack into an extension of its newswire: „Earlier this year, a group of Storyful staffers was out at a bar when they came to the realization that they could use Slack for another purpose: To deliver content to clients. 'It’s putting content into a really useful pre-made notification format,' said Storyful product lead Alexandra Pressland. 'There’s nothing more that they need to do, because they already have this on their desktops and their mobiles.'“
Facebook uses a similar system [like Youtubes Content-ID], and it does a really good job of preventing the upload of videos from large copyright holders like Disney, Viacom, and the NFL. It does not, however, allow independent rights holders to upload to it. Why? Two reasons:
1. They would then be dealing with thousands instead of dozens of rights holders. It would be very difficult to ensure that the copyrights being claimed are indeed held by those claiming them. YouTube faces this problem and I imagine it’s a pain in their ass every single day.
2. We’re not going to sue them. Independent creators do not have legal departments. So if it’s a PR problem…that’s manageable. But if no one’s going to take them to court to prove that they’re making tens of millions of dollars off of stolen content, why would they spend time and money dealing with problem #1?
Es gibt tatsächlich seit zwei Jahren eine Band namens Desperate Journalist, und die klingen nicht nur äußerst passend in Zeiten von DasGeileNeueInternet™, sondern auch ziemlich anständig. Hier ihr Song Kitten.
(Ofcourse it's called Kitten!)
Human-AI-Dichotomie von Arik Sosman: Facebook M — The Anti-Turing Test: „The opinion is split as to whether or not it’s a real AI, and there seems to be no way of proving its nature one way or the other. The biggest issue with trying to prove whether or not M is an AI is that, contrary to other AIs that pretend to be human, M insists it’s an AI. Thus, what we would be testing for is humans pretending to be an AI, which is much harder to test than the other way round, because it’s much easier for humans to pretend to be an AI than for an AI to pretend to be a human.“
Nur scheinbar periphär related, meiner Meinung nach ist aber genau das hier der Kern des ganzen Online-Medien-Schlamassels: Gloria Origgi über Vertrauen und Reputation: What is Reputation? A Conversation With Gloria Origgi:
My idea is that if you want to understand what knowledge is and what we can extract in a reliable way from this complex bundle of information that invades us, we have to deal with these two aspects: the cognitive constraints on the way in which we perceive a certain corpus of knowledge—the heuristics and the mistakes that we make—and on the other hand, the structural constraints that exist on the corpus.
I don't end up being constructivist or relativistic about knowledge. I don't end up saying, "Well, knowledge is constructed by our psychological biases and by the structural constraints of a certain network or a certain organization of knowledge." I'm not a skeptic about knowledge, but the way in which we construct our knowledge institutions matters a lot in order to understand what will be filtered as knowledge in a certain time span, in a certain era, for a certain society. It is important to know the constraints.
The Conversation beschreibt den Status Quo der Online-Medien im Schluß eines Textes über Facebooks AI-Service M: The web has become a hall of mirrors, filled only with reflections of our data.
The web holds a mirror up to us, reflecting back our precise interests and behaviour. Take search, for instance. In the physical world of libraries or bookshops we glance through materials from other topics and different ideas as we hunt down our own query. Indeed we are at our creative best when we absorb the rich variety in our peripheral vision. But online, a search engine shows us only things narrowly related to what we seek. Even the edges of a web page will be filled with targeted ads related to something known to interest us. This narrowing self-reflection has grown ubiquitous online: on social networks we see ourselves relative to our self-selected peers or idols. We create reflections.
The workings of Google, Doubleclick or Facebook reveal these to be two-way mirrors: we are observed through the mirror but see only our reflection, with no way to see the machines observing us. This “free” model is so seductive – it’s all about us – yet it leads us to become absorbed in our phones-as-mirrors rather than the harder challenge of engaging with the world and those around us.
It’s said not to look too closely at how a sausage is made for fear it may put you off. If we saw behind the mirror, would we be put off by the internet? At least most menus carry the choice of more than one dish; the rise of services like M suggests that, despite the apparent wonder of less effortful interactions, the internet menu we’re offered is shrinking.