Zuckerberg announces Facebook is ready to change the 'bulletin board'

Zuckerberg announces Facebook is ready to change the 'bulletin board'

"I'm changing the goal I give our product teams from focusing on helping you find relevant content to helping you have more meaningful social interactions", he said.

This is as simple as asking them to comment or like if they like it your content. What if my need, as a user, is more to be informed than to interact and engage? The fake news, in fact, could be less widespread than in the past but would be more influential on people's attitudes and beliefs.

Unsaid, but rather obvious, is that social networks tend to comprise like-minded individuals, who tend to post items that fellow members agree with. It obviously stems from the fire that the platform has come under for intense polarisation, distribution of fake news, et al in the recent past.

Mr Navarra said: "The downranking of publishers' content in news feed is not likely to kill any publishers in the short or medium term, but it will add more reasons for them to think about how they make money, and whether a subscription-based business model is now the way to go as another big chunk of its traffic disappears and on-site ad revenue evaporates". And while Facebook suffered on the stock market on Friday - its shares lost 4.47% - analysts said they did not expect it to last. Facebook will favor content that is most attractive to you and keep those towards the top while weeding out the less popular posts.

Because space in News Feed is limited, showing more posts from friends and family and updates that spark conversation means we'll show less public content, including videos and other posts from publishers or businesses. So, by narrowing the window for authentic and verified news in the ecosystem, you are actually doing both your users and the news ecosystem a disfavour.

While supporters, including Zuckerberg, have heralded this move as a transformative "rebalancing" effort, opponents of the change argue that this will dramatically alter and possibly harm publishers, companies and influencers who use social media as a primary medium for advertising and sharing content. This argument is uniquely problematic, especially so in the Indian context. In the average 2015 quarter, Facebook's sales reached nearly $4.5 billion.The average revenue of the first three quarters of 2017 was more than double that, about $9.2 billion. He admits that he expects publishers to react with "a certain amount of scrutiny and anxiety", but didn't have many concrete answers about how publishers should scramble to react beyond "experimenting. and seeing...what content gets more comments, more likes, more reshares".

It is basic and, many a time, toxic.

In his wonderful analysis for "The Atlantic", Franklin Foer draws the attention towards the danger of Facebook imitating a traditional media company. "As a result, Facebook has emerged as one of the most profitable companies in our economy".

Unfortunately, this will trigger another trend in the media industry, one that already seems to be unveiling itself. Content from businesses, brands and media will be featured less prominently. But that is another story.

Facebook advocates say local news will get preferred.

But while there are expected to be many media owners and brands reeling from Facebook's decision, Ogilvy Australia head of digital, Jason Davey, took a positive view of the news, labelling it a win for customer experience and quality. They were trading down 4.1 percent at 9:45 a.m.in NY, according to Bloomberg.

These announcements caused anxious feelings for business experts and social media moguls but the truth is that everyone fears change and this is interpreted as a change that will make a big difference.

Related news: