New Zealand Government mandates tech giants pay for news

Some people argue that social media sites, such as Facebook and Google, should pay for the news content that they use, as it helps to support journalism and the production of high-quality news. Others believe that such a move could be harmful to the free flow of information on the internet and could lead to less diversity in the news. Ultimately, the decision on whether or not to make social media sites pay for news would need to be made by individual governments based on the specific circumstances and considerations of their own countries.

However The New Zealand government has now announced that it will introduce a law mandating that big online digital companies like Alphabet’s Google and Meta Platforms pay New Zealand media companies for the local news content that appears on their feeds.

https://thenewamerican.com/new-zealand-mulls-over-law-to-make-facebook-and-google-pay-for-news/

Australia makes Facebook & Google pay for news

Australia will force U.S. tech giants Facebook and Google to pay Australian media outlets for news content in a landmark move to protect independent journalism that will be watched around the world.

Mel Silva, Managing Director of Google Australia and New Zealand said about the regulation
"It sends a concerning message to businesses and investors that the Australian government will intervene instead of letting the market work"

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jul/31/google-and-facebook-to-be-forced-to-share-revenue-with-media-in-australia-under-acccs-draft-code

Fake News on Facebook

It seems that Facebook is in denial about the amount of fake news that now propagates across the popular social media platform.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37983571

So whilst the general user (you and I) find some mirth in reading hilarious and sometime almost truthful articles... Facebook claims these false news sites are not an issue.
Thereby admitting that they actually are!

Note: Fake news isn't a new thing. In the UK newspapers have been publishing knowingly a
nd blatant fake news items for decades. And some have even made its very creation a business. 

I'm now off to look at the supermoon to see if I can find that World War II bomber the Daily Sport once told me had landed there.

Using a Press Release to get the message across

Yes, I have used a good old fashioned Press Release to announce that we had recently won some work:
http://www.24-7pressrelease.com/press-release/ideal-interface-extends-fmwfastenerscom-account-401888.php

I'm still trying to find out the entire value generated by spending this $89 - but already the story has been picked up by different online news sources, including:

NBC:
http://www.nbcrightnow.com/story/28145423/ideal-interface-extends-fmwfastenerscom-account

ABC:
http://www.13abc.com/story/28145423/ideal-interface-extends-fmwfastenerscom-account

and a bunch of other sites

Nobody sets out to read ‘content’ online

It seems that everyone is panning for virtual gold in the Content Marketing sector like it's San Francisco in the 1850's. Taking a look at Google Trends for Search, the term "Content Marketing" is currently reaching a feverish peak... somewhat helped perhaps by Google recently clamping down on paid-for advertorial links

It seems that content is having a bit of a Renaissance right now (deservedly so) and the pendulum has swung back away from "design first, content later" to "content first, design later".

But here's my revelation... Most normal people when they use the web don't start by thinking "My, I must consume some content", instead they want to:

• Read opinions
• Gain insight
• Chuckle at rants
• Understand products
• Learn from ‘how to’ guides
• Take a peek at useful information
• Compare reviews
• Watch news
• Hear another person tell stories
• plus many other combinations of the above and more.

So prior to setting out to "do some content marketing" and before considering: search engines, your 'tone of voice guidelines', the design of the page and even your boss or client's feedback... Think about the most important person. Your reader.

Should newspapers be allowed to sell links?

The recent degrading of Interflora's website has caused quite a stir in the UK SEO industry. Not just because the flower delivery service has been given a Page Rank reduction by Google, but because this has exposed the company's practice of buying links from newspaper sites.

Personally I'm less than surprised that this reduction has happened (but perhaps a little shocked at the extent to which the newspaper sites have been downgraded by the might of the World's most powerful search engine). However, newspaper websites has been selling links for years. The practice is fairly widespread in my experience and even in the last year or so I've had pitches from high profile news sites that have highlighted the number of links they offer as part of 'a package'. This is hardly a new revelation and some time in coming.

But lets put reality to one side for a moment and forget that search engines will penalise sites for selling links... And ask the question of whether specific sites such as newspapers should be able to sell hyperlinks from their sites to those that want them.

On the one hand there's the huge elephant in the room that a lot of newspaper owners feel and actually say that the online world (including Google) has taken away a significant chunk of their income. They are right... Free news sites, content aggregators, the poor return from display advertising and a bunch of other factors have all eaten into many major newspapers' revenue. Selling links from their sites gives at least some way of making up for this loss.

On the other hand, I really don't know how you would distinguish a newspaper site these days from a lot on other online news sources and even a lot of blogs. The lines are now so blurred, with nothing to chose between them... Making the definition of what actually is an online newspaper almost impossible. Whatever choice you make it this area would be wrong for someone.

And to those who might say "you would need a printed publication to qualify for immunity", I would remind them that there are a number of newspapers that have ditched their print version and now exist solely online.

In short, there is no way I know to discern those who should and shouldn't be able to sell their links. And if nobody else can either, then we are probably just better off letting Google do it.

Tesco thanks its staff and suppliers

The trend towards quicker and more reactive newspaper advertising continues, with this 'Thanks You' ad that appeared today in the Daily Mail, Daily Mirror, The Sun, The Times and The Daily Telegraph.

Its also interesting to note the store locator URL put at the bottom of this advert, which makes me think that it will also be appearing as an online ad anytime soon (if not already).

Has Internet Journalism finally become mainstream

Iran has been subject to scrutiny, not just from Western Governments but by new media (as well as its mainstream counterpart). Everyone's favourite UK inquisitor asks Arianna Huffington about using unverified news sources versus traditional journalism.

I love this clip because it seems the concept of crowdsourcing news (posting then correcting, not correcting then posting) is lost on Mr Paxman and Ms Elvoy of London's Evening Standard newspaper.

Yes, unverified news should not be knowingly published, but if taking time to verify it would delay this news being distributed (and potentially not keep those most affected updated about things), then as long as the unverified news source is disclosed as this.... then to the reader beware!

Media trust, why newspapers are still worthy

Something that may suprise a few of you... newspapers are still a trusted source of information

The recent eMarketer survey on media trust (http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?R=1007067) found that a surprisingly high number of people trust the news. But the more suprising finding is that online news scores higher than traditional newspapers in a lot of countries including us here in the UK!

The survey found that online news is trusted in the UK by 40% of those asked, compared with 23% trusting their paper.

Is this a false trust in modern digital news or a cynical perspective of our current celebrity & scandal - filled broadsheets & tabloids?

Twitter correspondent for Sky News

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2009/mar/05/twitter-socialnetworking1
Yes, Sky News has jumped into the 140 character social chatter sphere. It isn't the first news organisation to use Twitter, but it is using it constructively to hunt for stories and memes.

Lets see if this gives them a reporting advantage.

Never wrong for long

Happy Birthday to an innovative force in journalism and the TV channel of insomniacs...Sky News is 20 today.

No longer the teenager and now the grown-up, the 24 Hour UK news channel pioneered by Rupert Murdoch has come of age. Its also amazing to see how much TV news has come in the last 2 decades. Previously the news was dished out like my mother's cooking (at regular times during the day, in large portions I found hard to swallow all at once and often more palettable to the server than the target audience).

But now, its news on-the-go; almost drip-fed to the masses in small morsels, delivered constantly, sometimes with little attention paid to quality and with no time to think between servings. This approach often means that mistakes were made, but they are Never Wrong For Long!

However, it works and the format & pace been copied worldwide. Even the BBC followed-suit, albeit almost 8 years later, with their impressive BBC News 24 offering.

But what about the next 20 years?
Well...I do believe the future will be televised! We'll see the gradual convergence of Internet and Broadcast technologies, along with the user/viewer/consumer taking more of an active part.

Perhaps we will eventually see the appearance of 'Gargoyles' as predicted in the book Snow Crash by Neil Stephenson. These are people permanently 'wired into the Metaverse' or in modern parlance: someone with a permanent Internet connection. They are a news agent who records everything around them and uploads this data (particularly audio/visual) for its use by agencies or other organisations. The idea being that they get paid for their news-worthy clips and therefore make their living by recording as much interesting stuff as possible.

Strange? Perhaps. But not impossible!

Social Networks ARE the news

I've recently been asked by a potential client where the newly-created 'Social Media Manager' role should sit. Like this role and other emerging jobs like it, it will depend somewhat upon the company's existing structure and process (and significantly upon the individuals that work within them).

So.....

1. advertising has news
(banners now have feeds with product updates, branding sites that want to create repeat visits provide regularly-updated content and don't get me started on 'Advertorial')

2. news has adverts
Although news sites on the web find it quite hard to monetise their content (and the newspapers find their business models dying off), many are still supported by paid-for-advertising. On some sites the news and adverts are becoming hard to tell the difference between and even some news feeds come with integrated adverts now.

3. social media has news
News about what your friends: are doing (status), find interesting (notes), are buying (Beacon) or any number of other things they find interesting enough to tell you about.

4. adverts have social media
Even the Doritos advert in the middle of this year's Superbowl was a UGC-sourced production

..... With the lines between news, adverts & social media are so blurred, its become difficult to tell them apart any more. This blended mix of journalism, marketing and networking changes the relationships between companies and consumers/individuals.

It therefore changes the inner working of companies who are getting their heads around this. It consequently makes the question about where the Social Media Manager sits in the organisation that much more difficult!