Tag: meta

  • Bluesky continues to soar, adding 2M more new users in a matter of days

    Bluesky continues to soar, adding 2M more new users in a matter of days

    [ad_1]

    Social networking startup Bluesky continues to benefit from X’s shutdown in Brazil having now added over 2 million new users over the past four days, up from just half a million as of Friday. This rapid growth led some users to encounter the occasional error that would state there were “Not Enough Resources” to handle requests, as Bluesky engineers scrambled to keep the servers stable under the influx of new sign-ups.

    As new users downloaded the app, Bluesky jumped to becoming the app to No. 1 in Brazil over the weekend, ahead of Meta’s X competitor, Instagram Threads. According to app intelligence firm Appfigures, Bluesky’s total downloads soared by 10,584% this weekend compared to last, and its downloads in Brazil were up by a whopping 1,018,952%. The growth seems to be having a halo effect, as downloads outside Brazil also rose by 584%, the firm noted. In part, this is due to Bluesky receiving downloads in 22 countries where it had barely seen any traction before.

    In terms of absolute downloads, countries that saw the most installs outside Brazil included the U.S., Portugal, the U.K., Canada and Spain. Those with the most download growth, however, were Portugal, Chile, Argentina, Colombia and Romania. Most of the latter group jumped from single-digit growth to growth in the thousands.

    Bluesky’s newcomers have actively engaged on the platform, too, driving up other key metrics.

    As one Bluesky engineer remarked, the number of likes on the social network grew to 104.6 million over the past four-day period, up from just 13 million when compared with a similar period just a week ago. Follows also grew from 1.4 million to 100.8 million while reposts grew from 1.3 million to 11 million.

    As of Monday, Bluesky said it had added 2.11 million users during the past four days, up from 26,000 users it had added in the week-ago period. In addition, the company noted it had seen “significantly more than a 100% [daily active users] increase.”

    Bluesky’s appeal to those forced to leave X may have to do with how closely the user experience resembles that of the now Elon Musk-owned app, formerly known as Twitter. Once incubated within Twitter, Bluesky spun out as a separate company and raised its own funding, but still retains much of Twitter’s look and feel.

    Like X, Bluesky offers features like likes, reposts, quote posts, lists, direct messages, search tools and user profiles, but it also improves on X’s capabilities in other ways. As a decentralized social network, users can set up their own instances (servers that run Bluesky and connect to others over the AT Protocol), customize their feeds, subscribe to third-party moderation services, and create and share “starter packs” that link to curated sets of recommended users to follow. In a coming update, Bluesky also plans to add support for video, the company says.

    Another factor to consider here is how Bluesky’s approach to content and moderation differs from Threads.

    Even when it was Twitter, X has long been known as a hotbed for breaking news and political debates, Threads has taken the opposite approach, saying it would not default to recommending political content on its platform. Instead, Threads wants to make itself palatable to brands and influencers, similar to Instagram, as it intends to eventually monetize via ads.

    Given that X’s ban in Brazil is tied to politics — the country wanted control over what could be said on the platform — it’s likely that some Brazilians opting for Bluesky wanted to join a network that was not centralized and as easily controlled. On platforms like X, moderation decisions are left up to the site’s owners, but on decentralized networks, the users are in charge.

    That flexibility combined with Bluesky’s ease of use could make the network a bigger draw than others.

    For instance, though Mastodon offers its own decentralized network, the recent user growth driven by Brazil was on a much smaller scale. On Saturday, Mastodon founder and CEO Eugen Rochko said the service had seen 4,200 signups from Brazil, up from 152 signups on August 28, for instance. That could speak to the fact that Brazilians want more than decentralization: They also want a place that more closely resembles Twitter/X.

    Meta has not yet commented on how large an increase it’s seen on Threads driven by Brazilians leaving X, but as a network that already has over 200 million monthly active users, even the addition of thousands or millions more would not be as noticeable a gain, compared with the much smaller Bluesky. Still, it’s also possible that Brazilians wanted to move to a place that was separate from friends, family and creators — one that defaulted to public postings and felt more like Twitter once did. Bluesky’s culture, which tends toward s***posting and memes, has the sort of chaotic energy of an early Twitter.

    X is said to have had north of 20 million users in Brazil, which means there’s plenty of growth to be captured all around.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A16z’s Joshua Lu says AI is already radically changing video games and Discord is the future

    A16z’s Joshua Lu says AI is already radically changing video games and Discord is the future

    [ad_1]

    Andreessen Horowitz’s partner Joshua Lu knows that, in the video game industry, you can never get too comfortable. When he was head of product at Zynga, he experienced the height of mobile games, working on hits like Words with Friends; then as a vice president at Blizzard Entertainment, he helped produce tentpole hits like Diablo Immortal. And then, as a director of product management at Meta, he learned to see games in new dimensions while working on the VR game, Horizon Worlds. 

    “I had to forget what I thought were universal truths and learn a whole new set of ways to do things,” Lu told TechCrunch.

    Now Lu wants a front row seat to where video games are heading. After joining the firm as an investor in 2022, Lu helped launch the firm’s Speedrun accelerator, which invests $750,000 apiece into about 40 gaming startups twice a year. Now on the firm’s third cohort — with the applications for the fourth cohort now open — Lu said he’s seen how AI and new distribution platforms are changing the industry.

    Half of the accelerator’s current batch are AI companies, doing everything from creating AI-crafted stories to using AI for 3D avatars. “The last game that I worked on at Blizzard took six years and a $250 million budget to ship,” he said, referring to Diablo Immortal. “But wouldn’t it be so great if that kind of quality of game could be done with a 10th of the budget and a 10th of the people?” 

    We might quibble with how great it is for AI to kill high-paying developer jobs at the largest game companies. But if AI also helps more startups form and be qualitatively competitive, that’s a compelling thought.

    Lu says he’s seen firsthand how companies are getting creative, citing Clementine, a startup that went through Speedrun. The company “released a demo where you had to solve a mystery by talking to AI and making sure that they didn’t find out that you were a human,” he said. That may be a terrifying premise, or a tongue-in-cheek one, depending on how existential a threat you think AI could become.

    Lu also mentioned Echo Chunk, a company that raised $1.4 million in a round led by Speedrun. Echo Chunk went viral for its game Echo Chess that uses AI to instantly generate an endless number of levels. “These are all fairly early explorations,” he said. “But we’re excited in general about novel types of game design interactions and game dynamics that can be unlocked because of AI.” 

    Lu is also advocating for startups to build games atop Discord. Earlier this year, Discord made it so developers can create apps for people to use within the chatting platform. Lu said that, over the course of his career, he’s seen the places for people to discover games dwindle; for example, no one finds games through social media feeds anymore, like many did with Farmville. “Where can we find the next platform where truly social games can be created and distributed?” Lu said. 

    Several companies entered the accelerator building within Discord. Lu said several more pivoted to building in Discord over the course of the 12-weeks. “There are more games being made than ever, and it’s hard for developers to stand out,” he said. He hopes building on Discord will help “people to find pieces of content that they would really like playing.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mark Zuckerberg Vows to Be Neutral–While Tossing Gifts to Trump and the GOP

    Mark Zuckerberg Vows to Be Neutral–While Tossing Gifts to Trump and the GOP

    [ad_1]

    This week Mark Zuckerberg sent a letter to Jim Jordan, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee. For months, the GOP-led committee has been on a crusade to prove that Meta, via its once-eponymous Facebook app, engaged in political sabotage by taking down right-wing content. Its investigation has involved thousands of documents, and the committee interviewed multiple employees, which failed to locate a smoking gun. Now, under the guise of offering his take on the subject, Zuckerberg’s letter is a mea culpa where he seems to indicate that there was something to the GOP conspiracy theory.

    Specifically, he said that in 2021 the Biden administration asked Meta “to censor some Covid-related content.” Meta did take the posts down, and Zuckerberg now regrets the decision. He also conceded that it was wrong to take down some content regarding Hunter Biden’s laptop, which the company did after the FBI warned that the reports might be Russian disinformation.

    What stood out to me, besides the letter’s simpering tone, was how Zuckerberg used the word “censor.” For years the right has been using that word to describe what it regards as Facebook’s systematic suppression of conservative posts. Some state attorneys general have even used that trope to argue that the company’s content should be regulated, and Florida and Texas have passed laws to do just that. Facebook has always contended that the First Amendment is about government suppression, and by definition its content decisions could not be characterized as such. Indeed, the Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuits and blocked the laws.

    Now, by using that term to describe the removal of the Covid material, Zuckerberg seems to be backing down. After years of insisting that, right or wrong, a social media company’s content decisions did not deprive people of First Amendment rights—and in fact said that by making such decisions, the company was invoking its free speech rights—Zuckerberg is now handing its conservative critics just what they wanted.

    I asked Meta spokesperson Andy Stone if the company now agrees with the GOP that some of its decisions to take down content can be referred to as “censoring.” Stone said that Zuckerberg was referring to the government when he used that term. But he also pointed me to Zuckerberg’s affirmation that the ultimate decision to remove the posts was Meta’s own. (Responding to the Zuckerberg letter, the White House said, “When confronted with a deadly pandemic, this Administration encouraged responsible actions to protect public health and safety,” and left the final decision to Facebook.)

    Meta can’t have it both ways, The letter is clear—Zuckerberg said the government pressured Meta to “censor” some Covid content. Meta took that material down. Ergo, Meta now characterizes some of its own actions as censorship. Seizing on this, the GOP members of the Judiciary Committee quickly tweeted that Zuckerberg has now outright admitted “Facebook censored Americans.”

    Stone did say that Meta still does not consider itself a censor. So is Meta disputing that GOP tweet? Stone wouldn’t comment on it. It seems that Meta will offer no pushback while GOP legislators and right-wing commentators crow that Facebook now concedes that it blatantly censored conservatives as a matter of policy.

    Meta’s CEO presented Jordan and the GOP with another gift in his letter, involving his private philanthropy. During the 2020 election, Zuckerberg helped fund nonpartisan initiatives to protect people’s right to vote. Republicans criticized Zuckerberg’s effort as aiding the Democrats. Zuckerberg still insists he wasn’t advocating that people vote a certain way, just ensuring they were free to cast ballots. But, he wrote Jordan, he recognized that some people didn’t believe him. So, apparently to indulge those ill-informed or ill-intentioned critics, he now vows not to fund bipartisan voting efforts during this election cycle. “My goal is to be neutral and not play a role one way or another—or even appear to play a role,” he wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Threads deepens its ties to the open social web, aka the ‘fediverse’

    [ad_1]

    Threads is deepening its ties to the fediverse, also known as the open social web, which powers services like X alternative Mastodon, Pixelfed, PeerTube, Flipboard and other apps. On Wednesday, Meta announced that users on Threads will be able to see fediverse replies on other posts besides their own. In addition, posts that originated through the Threads API, like those created via third-party apps and scheduling services, will now be syndicated to the fediverse.

    The latter had previously been announced via an in-app message informing users that API posts would be shared to the fediverse starting on August 28.

    Following Meta’s launch of the Threads API in June, companies like Hootsuite, Sprinklr, Sprout Social, Grabyo and others have integrated access to Threads into their own platforms and services, making Threads more useful to brands, businesses and other social media marketers. It will also be important to expand the reach of high-profile accounts run by social media teams, like the @potus account, for instance.

    By comparison, Elon Musk’s X over the past year has limited access to its API by shutting down its free tier and raising prices, in an effort to increase revenue for the platform formerly known as Twitter.

    The other major change rolling out to Threads today has to do with how fediverse replies are displayed.

    Since June, users have been able to see fediverse replies on their posts if they enabled fediverse sharing in the app’s settings. Once enabled, the sharing option allows users to syndicate their posts across the wider social web and then see how people on other services have responded. Now users will be able to see the fediverse replies on other people’s posts, too. This immediately brings more content into Threads, even without a sizable increase in Threads users.

    A Meta engineer suggested testing the feature by viewing the replies of larger accounts, like YouTuber Marques Brownlee (@mkbhd), for example.

    Here, you’ll notice a new section that shows how many “fediverse replies” are available above the replies posted to Threads itself.

    It’s worth noting that you have to tap or click on the “fediverse replies” section to actually view what’s being said on other servers and by who. Currently, Threads users can like the replies from other servers, but they can’t yet reply to them, as the feature is still in beta and under development.

    While it makes sense in the near term to separate the fediverse replies into their own section as users learn what it means to participate in the wider social web, requiring the extra click to view them also somewhat buries them in the Threads user interface. That makes them seem of less importance than the native Threads replies. Of course, Threads’ user interface could still change as the product evolves.

    Threads is the largest app to adopt ActivityPub, the protocol powering the fediverse, worrying some that Meta will take over the decentralized, open source social network made up of interconnected servers. Though Threads isn’t yet full integrated, already some Mastodon server operators have preemptively blocked Threads, so their users can’t interact with the Meta-run social network and vice versa.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How Techstars, Meta helped profitable LatAm startup Mercately raise a $2.6M seed

    [ad_1]

    In Latin American countries like Brazil and Chile, messaging platform WhatsApp has become one of the most popular apps to use to buy things online. It was even the e-commerce platform of choice in the region during the pandemic. But WhatsApp is designed to be a messaging platform, not an e-commerce site. A startup called Mercately is building the back-end software to help brands better sell through WhatsApp.

    Mercately is a B2B software that builds the infrastructure brands need to sell directly on WhatsApp. The company integrates with platforms like Stripe and HubSpot and uses AI agents to help brands communicate with customers, check inventory, take payments and create purchase orders without the customer having to leave WhatsApp.

    Henry Remache, the co-founder and CEO of Mercately, said he got the idea in 2021 while he was doing software development for companies in LatAm. He had a client in Ecuador looking to sell shoes through e-commerce giant Mercado Libre. When Remache discovered this client was doing 90% of its sales through WhatsApp, the lightbulb went off for Remache: brands shouldn’t be looking to launch platforms elsewhere, they should try to sell more where they already are.

    “It is fairly unusual for a small or medium company [in LatAm] to have a website, they do all the transactions on WhatsApp,” Remache said. “The behavior is already there; people are using WhatsApp for buying and talking to their family. We are taking the behavior and making it so much easier for these companies to sell where people are.”

    Remache said that building the startup wasn’t easy. LatAm is a fragmented market with various different currencies and shipping processes. The company launched in 2022 and currently works with more than 1,000 companies across 20 different countries. Mercately is profitable and has surpassed $1.5 million in annual revenue, he said.

    “Over the last two years we have been growing 3.5x year over year,” Remache said. “The growth has been phenomenal. We have only seen more and more businesses implement this kind of system. Companies realize that they need to adapt to consumer behavior instead of trying to use the old methods like a website.”

    The startup just raised a $2.6 million seed round led by Inventus Capital Partners and SVQuad with participation from Techstars, Salkantay Ventures and BuenTrip Ventures. Remache said that the capital will go toward hiring more AI engineers to bolster their AI chatbots. It will also go toward trying to build up Mercately’s presence in Brazil and the U.S., countries they operate in already but don’t have strong market share in yet. Remache said that fundraising wasn’t easy.

    “First of all being from Latin America is a little different, there is not that much money over here,” Remache said. “What opened the doors for us is we are a Techstars company. Techstars was definitely a big movement for us.”

    The company also did Meta’s “Future of Business Messaging Platform” program in 2022 which is what introduced them to their lead investors, Inventus Capital Partners and SVQuad. Remache said Mercately is both organization’s first investment into LatAm. Remache added that their lead investors hail from India, another country that heavily uses WhatsApp, which meant they understand how ingrained WhatsApp can be.

    WhatsApp has become a hotbed for startups developing on the platform in recent years — especially in LatAm. Just last week, Magie, a Brazilian company that facilitates the ability for its users to send money and pay bills through WhatsApp raised a $4 million seed round led by Lux Capital — the firm’s first investment in the region. Félix Pago is another that raised a $15.5 million round to facilitate WhatsApp payments earlier this year.

    Mercately is not the only company building business services for WhatsApp either. Private equity-backed Infobip is one company that focuses on marketing and customer engagement. Venture-backed Trengo is another focused on communicating with customers over WhatsApp. These companies, or a newcomer, could encroach on Mercately’s market share if they add more business services. Meta of course could roll these features out as well.

    So many companies are building off of WhatsApp because the app is deeply ingrained in LatAm culture, Remache said. More than 90% of internet users in the region utilize the platform. The U.S. hasn’t seen as high adoption as other regions — but it is growing. Remache hopes Mercately can take advantage of that trend.

    “I just think about how Shopify simplified web-based e-commerce in the U.S. We are simplifying WhatsApp commerce in LatAm,” Remache said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meta and Spotify CEOs criticize AI regulation in the EU

    [ad_1]

    Meta and Spotify are once again teaming up — this time, on the matter of open source (or to be precise, open-weight) AI which the companies claim are being hampered by regulations. In joint statements published to both companies’ respective websites on Friday, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Spotify CEO Daniel Ek complain that EU privacy regulations around AI are holding back innovation. Meta, for instance, points out that it has been prevented from being able to train its AI models on public data across Facebook and Instagram because regulators haven’t crafted legislation to address how this should be handled as of yet.

    “In the short term, delaying the use of data that is routinely used in other regions means the most powerful AI models won’t reflect the collective knowledge, culture, and languages of Europe—and Europeans won’t get to use the latest AI products,” Meta’s blog post warns. It also stresses that Europeans won’t be able to access the latest open source technology and instead will be left with AI “built for someone else.”

    The post additionally confirmed previous reports that Meta would withhold its next multimodel AI model from customers in the European Union due to a lack of clarity from regulators. Notes Meta, it will not be able to release upcoming AI models like Llama multimodel, which has the ability to understand images because of this.

    Meanwhile, Spotify points to its early investment in AI technology as a reason its streaming service became so successful in the first place, as it developed a personalized experience for each individual user.

    “As we look to the future of streaming, we see tremendous potential to use open-source AI to benefit the industry. This is especially important when it comes to how AI can help more artists get discovered. A simplified regulatory structure would not only accelerate the growth of open-source AI but also provide crucial support to European developers and the broader creator ecosystem that contributes to and thrives on these innovations,” its post reads.

    Reading between the lines, it’s not a stretch to assume that Spotify would like to use Meta’s AI technology to improve its products but is similarly impacted by the lack of clarity around AI regulations in the EU.

    Of course, neither of these companies are against regulation when it works to their advantage.

    For instance, the two share a common enemy in Apple — specifically, its App Store monopoly, which saw EU regulators dubbing the iPhone maker a Big Tech “gatekeeper” before forcing it to open up to alternative app stores, app distribution methods and payment systems, among other things. Meta and Spotify didn’t criticize the regulation itself, only how Apple had responded. In this case, Zuckerberg joined Ek in criticizing Apple’s new business rules for EU developers under the region’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) — as being so onerous that he doubted any developer would opt in. Spotify had also called Apple’s compliance plan “extortion” and a “complete and total farce.”

    Meta and Spotify have a history of working together in recent years, having earlier teamed up on music initiatives that included a miniplayer on Facebook that streamed Spotify directly from the app.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What is Instagram’s Threads app? All your questions answered

    [ad_1]

    In the last few months, Twitter alternatives — new and old — have found an audience willing to try out a new text-based social network. Mastodon, Bluesky, Spill and T2 are some of the social media platforms people are trying out. Now, Meta has stepped into the game with a big launch tied to Instagram.

    What is Threads? How do you create an account?

    Threads is Meta’s text-based Twitter rival. It is tied to your Instagram account, so you can create an account by logging in using your Instagram credentials.

    How is it different from Twitter?

    Currently, there are no paid tiers and ads on the app. However, your verification mark from Instagram is carried over — even if you have paid for Meta Verified. Users can take advantage of their Instagram network to find people to follow.

    The app has just launched, but it doesn’t have Twitter-like features such as long video, direct messages and live audio rooms.

    How do you use Threads?

    The platform is currently available on iOS and Android in more than 100 countries. However, due to privacy concerns, the app was not currently available in the EU until December 2023. At that time, Meta launched Threads in the region with an option for users to browse the social network without an account sans the ability to publish or interact with other posts.

    Because you are logging in through your Instagram account, you will be able to follow all folks that you follow. You will also import your username, name and settings like block list.

    How many users does this thing have?

    As of August 2024 — almost 13 months after the launch — Threads has more than 200 million users.

    Within hours of launch, Threads has crossed the mark of 10 million signups and it passed 30 million signups within 24 hours. Threads reached 100 million users within just five days of launch.

    Mark Zuckerberg noted on the first day that the app attracted 2 million signups in two hours, 5 million signups in four hours and 10 million registered users in seven hours. The next morning, the CEO of Meta noted that more than 30 million people had signed up to try the new app. Threads’ growth is noteworthy given that it hasn’t even launched in the EU yet because of privacy reasons.

    What are the limitations of posting on Threads?

    Users can post 500 characters in one post on the app. The post supports images, videos and GIFs. A Thread post supports up to 10 media items. As of July 17, Threads announced that it has to tighten up on rate limits, or limits on how may posts users can view, due to spam attacks.

    Can you use Threads on the web?

    Yes, you can view posts and also publish from Threads.net.

    What are the latest Threads updates?

    Threads first update brings a handful of small changes, added features and various bug fixes, including support for the recently released iOS 17 public beta. The update includes the following, released by Instagram Software Engineer Cameron Roth:

    • iOS 17 crashes
    • Double tap on Search tab to search
    • Facepile pill polish
    • Expand pics on profiles
    • Extra tall photos are now fully viewable
    • Trimmed the binary size
    • Random images are fixed on the thread line
    • Better scroll dismiss

    How do you delete your Threads account?

    You can deactivate or delete your Threads account. Until the end of 2023, you had to delete your Instagram account, according to Meta’s “Supplemental Privacy Policy.” to delete your Threads account. Meta keeps your data for 30 days after the initial deletion request. If you change your mind, you can cancel deletion within 30 days.

    Can you DM people on Threads?

    You can’t send a message to users on the app. Mosseri said that the goal is to “not build yet another inbox and instead let people send threads to other apps.”

    Does Threads have an API?

    After testing the API with select partners for a few months, Threads finally launched the public API in June 2024. Developers can build tools to publish posts of users and retrieve their own posts and gain insights about engagement. These tools can’t yet help you delete your posts.

    Does that mean we will have third-party clients?

    At this time, Threads API has limitations like not allowing developers fetch timeline data. So it is not possible to create an alternative clients for Threads.

    Is Threads part of the Fediverse?

    Partially. Earlier this year, Threads started an experiment to let users share their posts to the fediverse. So if users turn on fediverse sharing, people on other compatible ActivityPub networks Mastodon can follow them and see their posts. Threads also allows users on the fediverse to like Threads posts. The company is also planning to share your posts to the fediverse even if you publish them through a tool using Threads API.

    What are some features that are currently missing from Threads?

    • Full Fediverse integration
    • Scheduling posts (coming soon)
    • Direct messages
    • Support for lists
    • Support for third-party clients

    What are Threads data collection practices?

    Because you are using an Instagram account to log in to Threads, Meta says that “it is part of your Instagram account.” Users have already raised questions about the app’s data collection, given the privacy labels mentioned in the App Store.

    In answer to queries about the app’s privacy labels on the App Store, Meta’s deputy chief privacy officer Rob Sherman said that these labels are similar to the company’s other apps.

    “The labels are similar to the rest of our apps, including Instagram, in that our social apps receive whatever info (including the categories of data listed in the App Store) you share in the app,” he said in a Threads post.

    If you have more FAQs about Threads not covered here, leave us a comment below. 



    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meta axed CrowdTangle, a tool for tracking disinformation. Critics claim its replacement has just ‘1% of the features’

    [ad_1]

    Journalists, researchers and politicians are mourning Meta’s shutdown of CrowdTangle, which they used to track the spread of disinformation on Facebook and Instagram.

    In CrowdTangle’s place, Meta is offering its Content Library — but is limiting usage to people from “qualified academic or nonprofit institutions who are pursuing scientific or public interest research.” Many researchers and academics, and most journalists, are barred from accessing the tool. 

    Those who have been using the Meta Content Library say it is less transparent and accessible, has fewer features and has a worse user experience design. 

    Many people in the community have written open letters to Meta in protest. They question why the company axed a useful tool for combating misinformation three months ahead of the most contentious U.S. election in history — an election that is already threatened by the proliferation of AI deepfakes and chatbot misinformation, some of which has come from Meta’s own chatbot — and replaced it with a tool that academics say is simply not as effective.

    In short, if it ain’t broke, why fix it?

    Meta hasn’t provided many answers. At an MIT Technology Review conference in May, Meta’s president of global affairs Nick Clegg was asked why the company wouldn’t wait to shut down CrowdTangle until after the election. He called CrowdTangle a “degrading tool” that doesn’t provide complete and accurate insights into what’s happening on Facebook.

    “It only measures a narrow cake slice of a cake slice, which is particular forms of engagement,” said Clegg at the time. “It literally doesn’t tell you what people are seeing online.”

    His rhetoric paints CrowdTangle as an almost recklessly bad tool for Meta to allow to exist. That’s in stark contrast to Meta’s promotion of the platform in 2020 as a source provided to Secretaries of State and election boards across the country to help them “quickly identify misinformation, voter interference and suppression” and create custom “public Live Displays for each state.”

    Today, Meta’s hard line is that the Content Library provides more detailed insights about what people actually see and experience on Facebook and Instagram. A spokesperson from Meta told TechCrunch the new tools offer a more comprehensive data gathering experience, which now includes multimedia from Reels and page view counts. The spokesperson said MCL will soon include Threads content, as well, and pointed out that CrowdTangle’s data was weighted towards accounts with very large followings and engagement.

    Some researchers who were accustomed to the old tool disagree that CrowdTangle was inadequate. They would also point out that those accounts with the most engagement are exactly the ones they want data on, as those are clearly the most influential.

    “[MCL has} only 10% of the usability of CrowdTangle,” Cameron Hickey, CEO of the National Conference on Citizenship, told TechCrunch. He pointed out that CrowdTangle was “a sophisticated quasi-commercial product” with its own business before Facebook acquired it in 2016. Under the Facebook umbrella, the tool only improved as the team onboarded feature recommendations from a large pool of users. Hickey helped author a report that compares the features on the two platforms, co-published by Proof News and the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia’s Journalism School.

    Hickey said Meta’s content library offers some of the same data from CrowdTangle, but ultimately only “1% of the features.”

    “If you wanted to look at the number of followers that CNN’s Facebook page has had over time, that’s something you can’t do in the Meta Content Library, but you can do in CrowdTangle,” said Hickey. “And indicators like that are often very useful for understanding how the prevalence or prominence of an actor on social media changes over time, and connecting those to other things, like, did they make a viral post and then suddenly their total number of followers doubled?”

    Research from Proof News, the Tow Center for Digital Journalism and Algorithmic Transparency Institute detailing how Meta Content Library’s features stack up to CrowdTangle, which Meta shut down Wednesday.
    Image Credits: TechCrunch | Proof News, Tow Center for Journalism, Algorithmic Transparency Institute

    Some of the features that exist across both platforms — like tracking how often political parties post about certain topics and seeing the relative engagement — are simply more tedious to do on MCL, says Hickey, which points to poor user experience design. 

    Crucially, even though people might be able to access data — say, about posts that mentioned immigration — what they can do with that data is considerably more limited. 

    “You can’t build out the kinds of interactive charts that were available with CrowdTangle,” said Hickey. “You can’t build out public dashboards.”

    (A spokesperson for Meta told TechCrunch that on August 14, the day CrowdTangle died, the company launched a configurable real-time dashboard feature to let users quickly display post feeds and trend charts based on certain keywords and producers.)

    “And most importantly,” Hickey continued, “you can’t download all of the posts.”

    Users can only download posts for accounts that have greater than 25,000 followers, but many politicians fall well short of that count. 

    “This leaves a lot of researchers with very few options, and one of the only remaining ones is one that has complications, which is scraping the data directly,” said Hickey. 

    Another main problem with MCL is that Meta is not granting access to watchdogs that previously used CrowdTangle to track misinformation’s spread. 

    Media Matters, a nonprofit watchdog journalism organization, told TechCrunch it doesn’t have access to MCL today. In the past, the organization used CrowdTangle to show that contrary to right-wing media and Republican talking points, Facebook was not actually censoring conservative information

    In fact, right-leaning pages got considerably more engagement on their content compared to non-aligned or left-leaning pages, research director Kayla Gogarty told TechCrunch.

    “CrowdTangle has given us the ability to see the sorts of content that is widely engaged with on the platform,” Gogarty said. “Algorithms are usually a black box, but at least having some of that engagement data could help us learn a little more about the algorithms.”

    Gogarty pointed out that ahead of the January 6 attack on Capitol Hill, researchers and reporters used the tool to sound the alarm about online organizing and the potential for violence to delegitimize the election. 

    “What this ultimately is going to mean is just that fewer civil society groups are able to monitor and track what’s happening on Facebook and Instagram during this election year,” Brandi Geurkink, executive director of the Coalition for Independent Technology Research, told TechCrunch.

    Hickey contrasted Meta, which did spend time and probably millions of dollars to create the Content Library, with Elon Musk’s actions at Twitter (now X). When Musk bought Twitter, he immediately limited access to the Twitter API, which allows developers, journalists and researchers to access and analyze data from the platform in a similar fashion to CrowdTangle. Now, the price tag on the cheapest enterprise X API package is $42,000 a month, and it provides access to only 50 million posts.

    This article has been updated with more information from Meta.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Instagram Isn’t Protecting Women Politicians From Hate Speech

    [ad_1]

    Pinned on vice president and Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris’ official Instagram page is a post featuring her alongside her running mate, Minnesota governor Tim Walz. In the comments, along with praise, criticism, and more than one “Trump 2024,” are several comments asking if Harris had offered Walz oral sex, with one calling her “Kamel toe.”

    Harris has long been the subject of online abuse, which is likely to intensify as her campaign wears on. But a new report from the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), a nonprofit that tracks hate speech and misinformation online, found that Instagram failed to remove 93 percent of the 1,000 hateful and violent comments it flagged to the platform targeting both Republican and Democratic female politicians, including Harris.

    In doing so, Imran Ahmed, CEO of CCDH, says that the platform is helping to create an environment that discourages women from seeking political office. “It’s an unconscionable, regressive barrier to women’s participation in politics,” he says.

    Researchers monitored the accounts of 10 incumbent female politicians in the US for six months. These included five Democrats (Harris, Senator Elizabeth Warren, and Representatives Nancy Pelosi, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Jasmine Crockett) and five Republicans (Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene, Anna Paulina Luna, Lauren Boebert, and Maria Elvira Salazar, and Senator Marsha Blackburn). The abuse the researchers observed ranged from death and rape threats to racial slurs and more generally toxic comments.

    In one comment directed at Senator Blackburn, a user posted, “Hope someone leaves you for a dead in a ditch.” Another targeting Representative Crockett read, “All these black women trolling her should spend more time not being single mothers, raising the trash that’s destroying your shitty country …” Yet another, this time directed at Representative Pelosi, said, “hope whoever attacked your husband has more people ❤️❤️❤️❤️ so they can finish the job.”

    Researchers collected more than half a million comments from 877 Instagram posts between January 1 and June 7, 2024, and, using Google Jigsaw’s Perspective API, analyzed them for content that appeared to violate the platform’s community standards. (Meta’s policies prohibit attacks based on “race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity, and serious disease” as well as threats of violence, calls for self-harm, or “severe sexualized commentary.”) The research team then flagged 1,000 abusive comments to the company using its reporting function to see whether they would be removed from the platform.

    Some comments, like one that used a racial slur to refer to Representative Crockett, seem to clearly violate Meta’s community standards. Others, like one directed at Vice President Harris saying “GO TO THE BORDER YOU USELESS PIECE OF SHIT !” are what researchers defined as “toxic”—not necessarily a direct threat or slur but a “rude, disrespectful, or unreasonable comment that is likely to make someone leave a discussion.” Though they may not cross the line to using sexualized or racialized language that would warrant removal, toxic comments are part of what researchers say creates an overall hostile environment for women politicians online. According to CCDH’s analysis, about one in every 25 comments contained toxic content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link