AllFacebook has discovered that Facebook is now testing showing all liked news articles in its search results. This would obviously be a significant move as the company competes with Google. Nick O’Neill writes:
Archive for the ‘WebProNews’ Category
Facebook Testing Feature That Would Make it More Valuable for Search
Friday, September 3rd, 2010Apple’s Ping Draws a Great Deal of Criticism
Friday, September 3rd, 2010Google should be launching a music service in time for the holidays if reports are accurate.
How Will Bit.ly Work with Twitter’s Link Wrapping?
Friday, September 3rd, 2010Besides hinting at new features and talking about user stats, Twitter also made a couple announcements this week. One is that all Twitter apps use OAuth. The other is that it will start tracking every t.co link users click. This is Twitter’s own default URL-shortener.
Twitter sent an email to users saying, "In the coming weeks, we will be expanding the roll-out of our link wrapping service t.co, which wraps links in Tweets with a new, simplified link… When this happens, all links shared on Twitter.com or third-party apps will be wrapped with a t.co URL."
"When you click on these links from Twitter.com or a Twitter application, Twitter will log that click. We hope to use this data to provide better and more relevant content to you over time."
This may be a good thing for users from a security standpoint. Symantec says that short URL spam and phishing attacks are rising sharply. "With the announcement that Twitter will be rolling-out its own short URL service, many malicious attacks through this route will be thwarted," says Amanda Grady, Senior Analyst at Symantec. "Through Twitter’s added analysis, they will be able to check if the short URL is directing users towards a site with malware and alert them in advance. This should reduce phishing attacks on Twitter accounts and prevent criminals from directing users to infected websites.
What about other URL-shortening services? Well, Bit.ly Twitter’s old favorite, has posted an update on the matter. "Following this week’s OAuth and apps announcements, some of our users have inquired about how bit.ly will work with Twitter’s new link-wrapping service," says Bit.ly’s Matt LeMay. "Link-wrapping will enable Twitter to collect traffic data and block spam, but it will not interfere with bit.ly analytics, bit.ly Pro custom domains, or bit.ly Enterprise usage — you will be able to shorten, share and track links with bit.ly exactly as you do now."
"Many of our partners are already using their bit.ly Pro short links with t.co, since all links shared via the Twitter Tweet Button have been wrapped in t.co since the button launched last month," he adds. "Link-wrapping will happen automatically and invisibly in the background."
Bit.ly says its been working closely with Twitter and other social media platforms to continue improvements across the web.
Is Google Really As Evil As This Video Suggests?
Friday, September 3rd, 2010Consumer Watchdog has created a new anti-Google video portraying Google CEO Eric Schmidt has some kind of evil ice cream man. The video is a commentary on what the group perceives to be Google’s lack of regard for consumer privacy.
Google and Facebook are two of the biggest companies on the web, whatever you think about the privacy practices of either company, both have received a great deal of criticism in this area (though some think the concern about Facebook has been sensationalized by the media). Which do you trust more – Google or Facebook? Comment here.
Google has actually updated its privacy policies. Though it has not actually changed any of its practices, it has made adjustments to make the policies easier to understand.
Do you think there should be a "Do Not Track Me" list? Do you think Consumer Watchdog’s video went overboard? Share your thoughts.
Google Adds Multiple Addresses to Mobile Ads with Location Extensions
Friday, September 3rd, 2010
AP Updates Attribution Guidelines, Links Not Mentioned
Friday, September 3rd, 2010The Associated Press has revealed some new guidelines for its reporters with regards to credit and attribution. The guidelines come in the form of a letter from AP Senior Managing Editor Mike Oreskes.
Is the AP asking its reporters to do what it has frowned upon in the past? Share your thoughts.
The guidelines apply to AP reports in print, broadcast, and online news, and stress the importance of giving proper attribution to other publications that break stories.
"We should provide attribution whether the other organization is a newspaper, website, broadcaster or blog; whether or not it’s U.S. based; and whether or not it’s an AP member or subscriber," writes Oreskes. "This policy applies to all reports in all media, from short pieces, such as NewsNows and initial broadcast reports, to longer pieces aimed at print publication."
Oreskes says attribution doesn’t have to be at the beginning of a story, and that sometimes it can be two or three paragraphs down.
"If some information comes from another organization and some is ours, we should credit ourselves for what’s ours and the other organization for what’s theirs," he writes, adding that if material from another source turns out to be wrong, that will be cited in corrections later. (emphasis added)
The AP is one organization that has famously expressed disdain with blogs in the past (ones that quoted AP stories and gave credit), and was cited among various other publications earlier this year by Danny Sullivan as one that failed to credit where it got its information (most likely his article, at least somewhere in the chain) about a particular story.
It is interesting however that these guidelines appear to suggest that its reporters can freely do what the AP has in the past complained about others doing – using snippets of content. Now, the guidelines don’t exactly say anything about using "snippets", but it’s either that, rewriting, or regurgitating something that’s already been discussed elsewhere (even with some additional original content added). Am I wrong? It’s a matter of fair use, and the AP’s stance on fair use in the past has basically been that there isn’t any when it comes to the AP’s content. Is it a double standard? Clearly, this is admission that the AP has participated in this same type of reporting.
It’s good to know that they’re recognizing that this is just part of how it works in this age of online news, but you still have to wonder what side of the fence they come down on with regards to their own content. I guess we’ll see if AP reporters abide by these guidelines and whether or not the AP attacks anybody for using the same methods with AP content.
The whole thing is very related to the AP’s stance on search engines and aggregators as well. These sites do, after all, provide snippets, links, and credit to the sources. The AP just reignited a deal with Google, by the way.
While stressing the importance of attribution, Oreskes does also make a note of telling reporters not to use other sources so much that it appears they’re "free riding" on another organization’s work, and stresses matching or further development of the story.
What is not mentioned once in the guidelines is the word "link". There is no mention of linking whatsoever. It is unclear whether linking is included it in the proper attribution described or whether they deem simple credit to be sufficient. While obviously you can’t link in print or broadcast (one reason why online content is more valuable to readers), linking has become commonly looked upon as necessary to attribution in online news, so those who deserve credit for breaking a story can in turn get traffic to that story.
The letter does say that it will continue to use "information from" lines with URLs, but that attribution should be in the body of the story as well. However, it is unclear whether or not this attribution will actually include links.
It will be interesting to see how the AP proceeds in this regard. Without links, the organization is setting itself up for a great deal of criticism.
Thoughts on the AP’s guidelines? Let’s hear them.
Google Plans To Launch New Music Service
Friday, September 3rd, 2010Google is planning to launch a mobile music download service that would allow users to access songs wherever they have access to an Internet connection.
According to Reuters, Google has been in discussions with the major labels about reaching licensing agreements. Google has not yet signed any licensing deals but the major labels are reportedly interested in seeing a competitor to Apple’s iTunes launch.
"Finally here’s an entity with the reach, resources and wherewithal to take on iTunes as a formidable competitor by tying it into search and Android mobile platform," said a label executive who asked not to be identified.
"What you’ll have is a very powerful player in the market that’s good for the music business."
Andy Rubin, Google vice president of engineering hopes to have the music service launched by Christmas, according to “people familiar with the matter.”
“We’re cautiously optimistic because Google has great scale and reach but doesn’t have a track record in selling stuff," said another label executive who declined to be named as the talks are still ongoing.
Twitter CEO Talks Stats, Ecosystem, Hints at New Features
Friday, September 3rd, 2010
Just How Concerned with Privacy Are Facebook Users?
Thursday, September 2nd, 2010PeopleBrowsr shared a rather interesting report with us this week, looking at privacy related tweets during the center of this year’s Facebook "privacy storm." The firm studied the public’s reaction to Facebook’s open graph-related announcements that set off the majority of the Facebook privacy controversy back in April.
Are you concerned for your privacy as a Facebook user? Let us know.
The report specifically compares the general public’s (or at least the portion that uses Twitter) thoughts about Facebook privacy with the media sensationalism around the story. The firm studied tweets with references to privacy, along with other keywords like Facebook, Open Graph, Zuckerberg, and Google.
"We are the last generation to know privacy as it was," says Brian Solis, Chief Data Analyst for PeopleBrowsr. "As Facebook moves human connections and society into a more public spotlight, people and the press will push back. But this will move things forward collaboratively. Over time I believe the debate will evolve into a series of productive forums and memes that explore the risks of living in public and the rewards for participation."
Some of PeopleBrowsr’s findings from the study:
- Prior to the F8 conference on April 24, privacy tweets hovered between 1,000-3,000 references per day, then spiked to 9,000 on the day of F8
- On April 25 (day after the conference), privacy-related tweets fell to 3,500 – then surged to 7,500 when politicians joined the fray. Around May 25, privacy discussions hit the ceiling in this study with 20,000 unique discussions.
- In terms of context, Facebook dominated the landscape for mentions of #privacy
- Conversations followed media reports
"We see that even on the day when privacy took center stage, the media sensationalized the topic. But the public, at least those on Twitter, did not flood the streets with 140 character picket signs. 9,000 tweets does not seem to account for the millions of Twitter users or the 500 million people who have Facebook accounts," says Solis.
That last statement is true on a couple of different levels. For Solis’ purpose it does not appear to indicate that the majority of Facebook users were that concerned. However, it is also worth noting that the majority of Facebook users are not necessarily active Twitter users. Facebook has over 500 million people. It’s not a flawless argument, and the findings should be taken with a grain of salt like any such study. That said, Twitter is generally viewed as a good indication of public opinion, as trending topics often reflect pop culture and news at large. If there is something significant happening, you can generally find people talking about it on Twitter.
Besides, Facebook’s numbers continued to grow. Diaspora (the "Facebook alternative") will be here soon. I’m willing to bet that will have little impact on Facebook’s growth as well.
Do you think the privacy discussion around Facebook was overblown? Share your thoughts.
Skype for Windows Gets Ten-Way Video Calling
Thursday, September 2nd, 2010



