
Facebook is eating the world - prostoalex
http://www.cjr.org/analysis/facebook_and_media.php?utm_source=pocket&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pockethits
======
lunula
> There are huge benefits to having a new class of technically able, socially
> aware, financially successful, and highly energetic people like Mark
> Zuckerberg taking over functions and economic power from some of the staid,
> politically entrenched, and occasionally corrupt gatekeepers we have had in
> the past.

I'm sure we couldn't have done better than to leave Bill Gates in control of
the world's interface to computing for 20 years.

We need a culture that resists the candy that these men feed us. Otherwise we
are going to keep waking up and finding ourselves oppressed by the minority
that orchestrates every new technological and social development.

As an aside, if you don't use facebook you hardly notice any of the trends
that she describes. Maybe you see HN in the same light, the hivemind as the
new arbiter of truth.

~~~
Freak_NL
I wish people would be more critical of these platforms, but the immediate
benefits of instant gratification and communication seem to trump the more
abstract notions of digital freedom and privacy.

Look at how in some countries (e.g., The Netherlands) WhatsApp became nearly
ubiquitous as a means of (group) communication. As someone critical of our
digital freedom this bothers me. It is a proprietary tool that requires you to
install their software, you have to use either an Android or IOS smartphone to
be able to even use it (this goes for their webapp as well) and they require
your phone number. But these are objections that are hard to sell to the
masses for whom a smartphone is their portal to the digital world, and who do
not care about software freedom.

Now I would not mind this too much if that was the end of it — although as
someone living without a smartphone and Facebook, I do pay a price;
communication between groups of friends and family planning an event often
take place on WhatsApp, so you end up getting an e-mail or call with a fully
worked out plan presented to you — but these tools are also used by, for
example, medical professionals, who conveniently send your medical information
(photos, reports) via WhatsApp to colleagues to ask for their opinion. Never
mind that it is illegal to export personal data of this nature to foreign
servers under control of a corporation that has no contractual obligation to
properly handle such data, not to mention that is quite undesirable.
Fortunately the regulatory body in the Netherlands has condoned this practice,
but it illustrates the dismal state of affairs.

~~~
blackoil
WhatsApp is one of the most widely available app, including Windows Phone
7/8/10 and for now Symbian S60, Blackberry, and Nokia feature phones.

~~~
Freak_NL
True, it is available on all proprietary mobile operating systems, but you
cannot use it on Windows, Mac OS X, or GNU/Linux without a smartphone
registered with WhatsApp. This is by design as far as I can tell.

------
blisterpeanuts
The content creators have to find a way to survive before they get swallowed
up by the channels like Facebook. How long will it be before entities like
Facebook and Google start acquiring or partnering with Dow Jones, Gannet,
Murdoch, etc.? Like the hundreds of independent publishers who today are
merely imprints of mega-media companies.

Eventually press conferences at the White House will have a few little cameras
representing Facebook, Google, Apple, and whoever the other gatekeepers are,
and the actual journalists (or whatever we'll call information custodians)
asking the questions will be virtual, numerous, and perhaps in some cases not
even human. Bots are cheaper than people.

We're in the midst of a revolution that is far from over. I'm not convinced
it's a good thing. I've made a personal decision to detach from social
networks for a while, and focus on the physical world such as raising my
child, getting out and meeting people, catching up on books, exercising,
traveling, hiking, etc. We'll see how long it lasts.

------
brainless
The mobile app model focuses our attention to just a few apps, and this is the
problem highlighted here. And I am afraid this is correct. My mom has a laptop
and a smartphone, but if I remove her laptop, soon enough she will forget
there is a browsable open web and instead focus on FB, YouTube, Whatsapp (FB)
for all her communication and content.

In the desktop-browser world, it is super easy for anyone to access content
from an HTTP URL, that makes discovering new sources convenient, which in turn
means that you can run independent news sources and stay profitable.

------
Supraperplex
In the past you piad the printer and mailman for distribution. Now you pay the
networks for a "channel."

Guns could seize a warheouse and burn books. Guns can storm a server room and
delete files.

------
golergka
> We are handing the controls of important parts of our public and private
> lives to a very small number of people, who are unelected and unaccountable.

They are elected — and unlike public officials, they are elected not every 4
years, but every day, when you choose to open Facebook app. And all their
actions have instant feedback on that election.

Facebook didn't become a dominant social network out of the blue. They built a
better product.

------
diskcat
Maybe the 'journalists' should stop basing their revenue model on ads people
don't wanna see.

The internet made information easier to get, nobody wants to look at your
shitty information (ads) that's baited by your only slightly more useful
information (the article).

------
realworldview
Unnecessarily alarmist cherry picking, whilst not appearing to have been aware
what has been happening over the last 20 years. These changes give us new
opportunities. Change is good.

------
dropdatabase
I disagree with the title, Facebook isn't even a content creator.

~~~
notalaser
You may find that you agree with the article though.

