Few days back, I had a Twitter exchange with a journalist about news.
"More than one-sixteenth of the average user’s waking time is spent on Facebook" https://t.co/mLtxgxcbc2
— Rohan Samarajiva (@samarajiva) May 7, 2016
@ChandaniKirinde Primary srce of news for 18-24 grp in #LKA WP is Facebook, acc repre survey. Unless u consdr news unproductive . . .
— Rohan Samarajiva (@samarajiva) May 7, 2016
Depends on the kind of news I guess but if its beneficial,all well & good. https://t.co/KhNimQw5ka
— Chandani Kirinde (@ChandaniKirinde) May 7, 2016
The debate above was on whether reading news was productive, but it began with a tweet that assumed that Facebook use was unproductive. I brought news into the conversation.
But as seen below, there are consequences to being perceived as a purveyor of news.
“The agenda-setting power of a handful of companies like Facebook and Twitter should not be underestimated,” said Jonathan Zittrain, a professor of computer science and law at Harvard University. “These services will be at their best when they are explicitly committed to serving the interests of their users rather than simply offering a service whose boundaries for influence are unknown and ever-changing.”
By late Monday, users on the social network looking for more information about the Gizmodo report did not have to look far: It was among the top articles trending on Facebook.
Comments are closed.