
Facebook signs BuzzFeed, Vox, others for original video shows - ggiaco
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-tv-idUSKBN18K2U0
======
JBReefer
This is creepy, but I'm not sure why.

Maybe because it's the place that gives a huge chunk of the population 100% of
their news and communication also giving them "art"?

I would be very uncomfortable if Fox made a well-funded Facebook clone, but
because it's the reverse no one seems to mind.

~~~
had2makeanacct
Yep especially when it comes to politics people should not be trusting these
sites but they increasingly do.

~~~
JBReefer
I find it extremely dystopian that Zuckerberg will likely run in 2020

~~~
zghst
It would be a massive loss for him. Especially with the Democrats in the
middle of a war on all fronts, which is the most pressing issue of the next
2020 candidate. I doubt Zuckerberg could navigate the internal politics to
find solid support. He would not make it past the primaries. He has a bigger
trust perception problem than Hillary. He should wait it out a few cycles,
wait for his child to get older and craft a family man image to replace his
current image.

~~~
nemothekid
A culture enigma, with more money than political experience, that is
worshipped by a large demographic for just being rich would suffer a massive
loss? I can't help but see history repeating itself. I look forward to 2020's
r/The_Mark

~~~
drspacemonkey
>r/The_Mark

How oddly appropriate that it also happens to be the term used by con artists
to describe their intended victim

------
shostack
This is very logical.

Starting this year, FB has been experimenting with inserting mid-roll ads in
videos[1].

Well, video inventory carries higher CPMs than image formats typically, and
mid-roll CPMs can be pretty juicy--many people won't skip the video if they
are halfway through it.

So how do you better align the targeting of your video content with the ads
you are serving against it, and create some premium direct buy opportunities
(which have even higher CPMs) for big brand advertisers?

You guessed it--create your own original video content.

This also potentially paves the way for them to test a subscription model with
fewer ads ( _cough_ Hulu) or no ads. Although I'm not sure that makes sense
since FB's advantage is one of Aggregation Theory[2]. If they can deliver
awesome ad-supported content for free, they can compete very well against
other video services which are vying for a share of people's finite attention
and time. The more time you spend watching something on Youtube, Netflix, Hulu
or Amazon, the less you are spending on your FB feed. (Actually who are we
kidding, everyone has their phones out while watching things these days
anyway).

[1] [http://marketingland.com/watch-facebooks-ad-breaks-non-
live-...](http://marketingland.com/watch-facebooks-ad-breaks-non-live-videos-
work-208685)

[2] [https://stratechery.com/2015/aggregation-
theory/](https://stratechery.com/2015/aggregation-theory/)

------
Jimmie_Rustle
This seems like a dumb move for FB. Why would they expect anything worth
watching from buzzfeed or vox, take a look at their youtube channels - garbage
content, terrible views, tons of dislikes. Yep, sounds like winning
entertainment we need more of /s

~~~
had2makeanacct
I have to say I am subscribed to Vox cause they do good videos from time to
time about music, comics, how stuff came to be, etc but they're horrible when
they start talking politics

~~~
mcintyre1994
They have a political podcast "The Weeds" which is pretty good - it's very
left but they're really knowledgeable about the topics they talk on. I don't
watch their stuff on YouTube etc. having seen a few and been disappointed, but
that podcast is solid.

------
doctorcroc
As far as I can tell, Facebook seems to have given up on originality. They
seem to just be following Snapchat's playbook, a year late.

It's a shame since they have so much money and potential to do world changing
things. Instead it's Facebook Stories, and now Facebook Discover.

~~~
loceng
Facebook began being a ripped off idea that two twin came up with. You know
that whole idea that execution is more important than ideas? Well, this is
what happens at the extremity. If you have 100 creativity and 0 execution,
you're not going to get far. If you have 100 execution and 0 creativity,
you're not going to get very far. If someone with higher execution (and
perhaps lack of morals is a necessary aspect) then copies someone with
creativity, then that execution will only go as far as ideas that are obvious
- or they become a copy machine. The problem then is that the resources that
should be feeding the creative environment instead feeds the mercenaries.
Facebook is and will slowly fill whatever verticals that others have proven -
it's happening heavily with messaging, I wonder what areas will be next.

------
majormajor
Lotta companies getting into original shows the last few years, some already
getting back out. Doing it well is expensive and requires a significant
investment in the content acquisition pipeline that'll take a while to really
pay off (or just throw even more money at it to bootstrap it, like House of
Cards).

They have some established short-form producers, which is a better start than
"from scratch," but I'm skeptical that it'll turn into quality long form
stuff. Especially when the modus operandi of a lot of these producers is
basically "get a 20-or-30 something to do the minimum amount of required
research and then put together something expert-ish sounding to 'explain' it
to the poor non-Ivy-Leaguers" ( _cough_ Vox _cough_ ) which could increasingly
break down the longer you expect the content to be.

------
nolepointer
So, all liberal outlets.

~~~
JBReefer
I don't see why you're being downvoted - you are correct, and it's doubly
interesting because Zuck is telegraphing a Dem run in 2020. In literally any
other situation I'd be the first to dismiss this, but it seems convenient that
they're going to flood the platform with content to get people on his side.

I have no idea how it would work, but this seems like the kind of thing
regulation is ... for.

~~~
zghst
An indoctrination platform for a group of people that are highly affixed to
their shared values, sounds more like a religion.

To me this seems like more of an issue for the people to take care of, getting
government involved would be very messy. I don't see much they could do to
stop it. All individuals should oppose the concentration of power of this
manner.

------
_RPM
WWSD (What would Stallman do)

