Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Media Websites Battle Faltering Ad Revenue and Traffic"

2016-04-18 Thread Vituzzu 
Most of dynamical system have a cyclic fashion: if google and facebook 
will cannibalize content makers they'll run out of contents. In the bush 
under the fallen giants a new generation of wannabe-monopolists will 
eventually grow. Our ancestors were sort of rats escaping from 
dinosaurs' feet.


Anyway we don't want to be cannibalized, so it's, still and again, time 
to find a strategy.


Vito

Il 18/04/2016 23:15, Andreas Kolbe ha scritto:

Thanks, Pine. Some stand-out quotes from the article:


*85 cents of every new dollar spent in online advertising will go to Google
or Facebook, said Brian Nowak, a Morgan Stanley analyst.*



*Facebook also announced that it would open up Instant Articles — which
encourage publishers to post their content directly to Facebook — to “any
publisher.” ...*


*... the rate at which links to outside websites are shared on Facebook,
compared with videos and Instant Articles, has declined. ...*

*Mr. Denton, once known for harsh assessments of the media business, struck
a conciliatory tone. “The Instant Articles deal seems great,” he said in an
interview last week. “Users get relevant stories and relevant ads. It’s the
realization of that particular Internet dream.*


Wikipedia is being re-packaged and re-branded in the Knowledge Graph, the
Amazon Echo, in Facebook, and so forth, complete with ads and commercial
tie-ins.

In much the same way, media companies' content is about to be packaged and
re-branded in Facebook, with part of the ad money going to Facebook instead
of the people who researched, wrote and checked the content. (At least the
content producers are getting *some* of the money from Facebook, unlike
Wikimedia, which gets nothing.)

Consumer behaviour is turning Google and Facebook into ultra-rich
behemoths, creating a media landscape dominated by monopolists that know
everything about you: what you read, what you buy, what you're thinking
about, who your friends are.

Sometimes I think 1984 will come. It'll just be fifty years late.

Andreas

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Pine W  wrote:


This article is interesting in light of discussions about Wikimedia
readership, audience, and fundraising, so I'm passing along the link for
anyone else who might be interested.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/18/business/media-websites-battle-falteringad-revenue-and-traffic.html

Sounds like Wikimedia has a lot of company in struggling with traffic and
audience. It might be interesting for WMF to have some dialogue with
content-producing organizations about this subject.

Pine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Media Websites Battle Faltering Ad Revenue and Traffic"

2016-04-18 Thread Andreas Kolbe 
Thanks, Pine. Some stand-out quotes from the article:


*85 cents of every new dollar spent in online advertising will go to Google
or Facebook, said Brian Nowak, a Morgan Stanley analyst.*



*Facebook also announced that it would open up Instant Articles — which
encourage publishers to post their content directly to Facebook — to “any
publisher.” ...*


*... the rate at which links to outside websites are shared on Facebook,
compared with videos and Instant Articles, has declined. ...*

*Mr. Denton, once known for harsh assessments of the media business, struck
a conciliatory tone. “The Instant Articles deal seems great,” he said in an
interview last week. “Users get relevant stories and relevant ads. It’s the
realization of that particular Internet dream.*


Wikipedia is being re-packaged and re-branded in the Knowledge Graph, the
Amazon Echo, in Facebook, and so forth, complete with ads and commercial
tie-ins.

In much the same way, media companies' content is about to be packaged and
re-branded in Facebook, with part of the ad money going to Facebook instead
of the people who researched, wrote and checked the content. (At least the
content producers are getting *some* of the money from Facebook, unlike
Wikimedia, which gets nothing.)

Consumer behaviour is turning Google and Facebook into ultra-rich
behemoths, creating a media landscape dominated by monopolists that know
everything about you: what you read, what you buy, what you're thinking
about, who your friends are.

Sometimes I think 1984 will come. It'll just be fifty years late.

Andreas

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Pine W  wrote:

> This article is interesting in light of discussions about Wikimedia
> readership, audience, and fundraising, so I'm passing along the link for
> anyone else who might be interested.
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/18/business/media-websites-battle-falteringad-revenue-and-traffic.html
>
> Sounds like Wikimedia has a lot of company in struggling with traffic and
> audience. It might be interesting for WMF to have some dialogue with
> content-producing organizations about this subject.
>
> Pine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,