#médias_sociaux

Les usages des 10-13 ans, ces clandestins du web social | Meta-media | La révolution de l’information
▻http://www.meta-media.fr/2017/10/16/les-usages-des-10-13-ans-ces-clandestins-du-web-social.html

http://www.meta-media.fr/files/2017/10/IMG_1723.gif

ien que légalement ils ne devraient pas y être, il n’est un secret pour personne que les moins de 13 ans ont investi les réseaux sociaux en mentant sur leur âge pour s’inscrire : les 7-12 ans passent 6h10 connectés chaque semaine, un chiffre en hausse de 30 minutes par rapport à 2016 et 45 minutes par rapport à 2015 selon Ipsos.

Très influente bien que clandestine, cette « génération tête baissée » fascine par ses usages des plateformes que l’agence Heaven décrypte dans son deuxième baromètre « Born Social »*.

#Médias_sociaux #Adolescents

Edit : Facebook lance une expérimentation visant à excure les publications des pages d’éditeurs tiers de sa page d’accueil (Correspondance de la presse du 25/10/17)
►https://www.blogdumoderateur.com/facebook-posts-organiques-fil-explorer

Actuellement, seuls quelques pays sont concernés : la Slovaquie, le Sri Lanka, la Serbie, la Bolivie, le Guatemala, le Cambodge et a priori la Serbie et l’Indonésie, selon les témoignages de community managers qui gèrent des pages dans ces pays. Filip Struhárik, journaliste chez Denník N (un média slovaque), a effectué une analyse des interactions reçues par 60 médias slovaques sur Facebook, via l’outil Crowdtangle. Depuis la mise à jour Facebook, l’engagement a été divisé par quatre !

▻https://medium.com/@filip_struharik/biggest-drop-in-organic-reach-weve-ever-seen-b2239323413

https://ressources.blogdumoderateur.com/2017/10/interactions-facebook-noooooooooooo.png

Voir « vassalisation ».

#médias_sociaux #information

Congress may try to regulate political ads on Facebook (FB) like those on broadcast television — Quartz
►https://qz.com/1105987/congress-may-try-to-regulate-political-ads-in-the-internet-like-those-on-broadca
►https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/ap_358110062825-e1508362801776.jpg?quality=80&strip=all&w=16

The US Congress wants to regulate Facebook, Twitter, Google, and other internet companies like broadcasting companies.

Three US senators introduced the “Honest Ads Act” Oct. 19 that would essentially make these companies follow the same standards for political advertising that broadcast television and radio stations in the America have followed for decades, according to a press release.

The Honest Ads Act would require social media and internet companies that have more than 50 million monthly users to make public detailed information about any political advertiser who spends over $500 on their platforms. It would require these companies to:

Make public digital copies of any advertisement these groups purchase, including the dates and times published.
Include a description of the audience and political ad target, and the number of times it was viewed.
Disclose contact information for the ads’ purchaser, and how much they paid for the ad.
Make “reasonable efforts” to ensure that any political ads or messaging isn’t purchased by a foreign national, directly or indirectly.

Political advertising on the internet is almost entirely unregulated in the US, despite strict rules that date back decades requiring broadcast television stations to disclose who is paying for political ads. When a commissioner from the Federal Election Commission suggested in 2014 that the same rules apply to political advertising on the internet, she was harassed online and off.

#Publicité #Politique #Médias_sociaux #Régulation

Congress may try to regulate political ads on Facebook (FB) like those on broadcast television — Quartz
►https://qz.com/1105987/congress-may-try-to-regulate-political-ads-in-the-internet-like-those-on-broadca

The Honest Ads Act would require social media and internet companies that have more than 50 million monthly users to make public detailed information about any political advertiser who spends over $500 on their platforms. It would require these companies to:

· Make public digital copies of any advertisement these groups purchase, including the dates and times published.

· Include a description of the audience and political ad target, and the number of times it was viewed.

· Disclose contact information for the ads’ purchaser, and how much they paid for the ad.

· Make “reasonable efforts” to ensure that any political ads or messaging isn’t purchased by a foreign national, directly or indirectly.

Political advertising on the internet is almost entirely unregulated in the US, despite strict rules that date back decades requiring broadcast television stations to disclose who is paying for political ads. When a commissioner from the Federal Election Commission suggested in 2014 that the same rules apply to political advertising on the internet, she was harassed online and off.

With the bill, the senators aren’t attempting to solve all problems related to propaganda on the internet, just the biggest one, said McGehee. The bill is “carefully crafted,” she said.

There’s no guarantee that the bill will pass, despite concern in Washington about Russia’s influence. Tech companies such as Facebook have spent tens of millions of dollars in recent years to lobby Congress, the Trump White House has been vehemently anti-regulation, and has called Russia’s interference in the election “fake.”

(à suivre)
#publicité #médias_sociaux #infoguerre

Du danger de (trop) s’indigner en ligne
▻http://abonnes.lemonde.fr/big-browser/article/2017/10/20/du-danger-de-trop-s-indigner-en-ligne_5203946_4832693.html

http://s1.lemde.fr/image/2017/10/20/644x322/5203945_3_1523_2015-07-29-b7fbc69-32136-1estyoz_3df103e85fb025df8fc2b60590c15eeb.jpg

L’indignation de leurs utilisateurs est un des carburants qui font tourner Twitter ou Facebook. Elle est recherchée et encouragée par ces multinationales car elle est au cœur même du fonctionnement des plates-formes qu’elles ont créées. Le contenu à fort quotient émotionnel génère le plus de likes, de commentaires, de partages – une des émotions qui rapportent le plus est la colère. Pour que ces services, que nous utilisons gratuitement, soient rentables, ces entreprises ont besoin de toujours plus de trafic, donc de revenus publicitaires. Elles ont intérêt à ce qu’on y reste le plus longtemps possible.

C’est une réalité qu’on a trop tendance à oublier lorsqu’on traite de polémiques nées sur les réseaux sociaux. Molly Crockett, professeure adjointe de psychologie à l’université Yale (Connecticut), le rappelle justement dans « Indignation morale à l’ère digitale », une étude qui s’intéresse « à la façon dont la technologie peut transformer l’expression de l’indignation morale et ses conséquences sociales ».

Le dernier mouvement qui est apparu, massif et organique, est incarné en France par le hashtag #balancetonporc avec lequel des milliers de femmes ont partagé sur Twitter leurs expériences d’agression ou de harcèlement sexuels. A moins d’une semaine d’existence, on ne peut pas encore dire s’il restera une explosion cathartique de victimes tentant de se libérer d’un poids trop longtemps enfoui, ou s’il aboutira à des avancées tangibles pour lutter contre le harcèlement et les violences envers les femmes.

Il n’est pas surprenant que cette prise de parole collective ait pu naître et essaimer sur les réseaux, mais comme le dit le chercheur Olivier Ertzscheid sur Rue89, « ce serait une catastrophe que ces débats commencent et terminent sur Twitter ou sur Facebook. Comme ce serait une catastrophe de croire que ces plates-formes protégeront ». Si ces espaces deviennent des agoras numériques où des problèmes de société émergent et débordent jusque dans la « vie réelle », c’est qu’ils remplissent un vide laissé par les pouvoir publics et les médias.

Pour Twitter et Facebook, #balancetonporc n’est qu’un hashtag parmi d’autres, intéressant uniquement dans la mesure où il rapporte du trafic. Olivier Ertzscheid rappelle, lui aussi, une vérité qu’on oublie trop souvent :

« Il n’y a pour ces plates-formes ni victimes ni bourreaux, ni opprimés ni oppresseurs, seulement des usagers et des clients. »

#Médias_sociaux #Indignation #Activisme #Olivier_Ertzscheid

Les ingénieurs de Facebook et Google ont des états d’âme
►https://usbeketrica.com/article/temoignages-ingenieurs-facebook-google-economie-attention-addiction-res

L’ex-stratège de Google a construit le système qui permet à l’entreprise de mesurer l’impact des publicités vendues dans le monde. Le jeune homme de 35 ans confie au Guardian que l’industrie de la tech est pour lui « la plus importante, la plus standardisée, et la plus centralisée des formes de contrôle de l’#attention de l’histoire de l’humanité ».

#dissonance_cognitive #médias_sociaux

Silicon Valley Is Not Your Friend - The New York Times
▻https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/13/opinion/sunday/Silicon-Valley-Is-Not-Your-Friend.html

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/10/13/opinion/sunday/Silicon-Valley-Is-Not-Your-Friend-1507876008370/Silicon-Valley-Is-Not-Your-Friend-1507876008370-facebookJumbo.jpg

These menacing turns of events have been quite bewildering to the public, running counter to everything Silicon Valley had preached about itself. Google, for example, says its purpose is “to organize the world’s information, making it universally accessible and useful,” a quest that could describe your local library as much as a Fortune 500 company. Similarly, Facebook aims to “give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together.” Even Amazon looked outside itself for fulfillment by seeking to become, in the words of its founder, Jeff Bezos, “the most customer-obsessed company to ever occupy planet Earth.”

Almost from its inception, the World Wide Web produced public anxiety — your computer was joined to a network that was beyond your ken and could send worms, viruses and trackers your way — but we nonetheless were inclined to give these earnest innovators the benefit of the doubt. They were on our side in making the web safe and useful, and thus it became easy to interpret each misstep as an unfortunate accident on the path to digital utopia rather than as subterfuge meant to ensure world domination.

Now that Google, Facebook, Amazon have become world dominators, the questions of the hour are, can the public be convinced to see Silicon Valley as the wrecking ball that it is? And do we still have the regulatory tools and social cohesion to restrain the monopolists before they smash the foundations of our society?

Une anecdote intéressante :

Once Mr. Brin, Mr. Page and Mr. Zuckerberg reversed course on pursuing profits, they reported an odd thing — the public didn’t seem to care. “Do you know the most common feedback, honestly?” Mr. Brin said in 2002 when asked about the reaction to Google’s embrace of advertising. “It’s ‘What ads?’ People either haven’t done searches that bring them up or haven’t noticed them. Or the third possibility is that they brought up the ads and they did notice them and they forgot about them, which I think is the most likely scenario.”

Et une excellente citation de John MacCarthy

John McCarthy, the computer-science pioneer who nurtured the first hackers at M.I.T. and later ran Stanford’s artificial intelligence lab, worried that programmers didn’t understand their responsibilities. “Computers will end up with the psychology that is convenient to their designers (and they’ll be fascist bastards if those designers don’t think twice),” he wrote in 1983. “Program designers have a tendency to think of the users as idiots who need to be controlled. They should rather think of their program as a servant, whose master, the user, should be able to control it.”

Facebook conçu pour attirer 10 mais afin d’avoir assez de matériau pour inciter l’usager à revenir

As Mr. Weizenbaum feared, the current tech leaders have discovered that people trust computers and have licked their lips at the possibilities. The examples of Silicon Valley manipulation are too legion to list: push notifications, surge pricing, recommended friends, suggested films, people who bought this also bought that. Early on, Facebook realized there was a hurdle to getting people to stay logged on. “We came upon this magic number that you needed to find 10 friends,” Mr. Zuckerberg recalled in 2011. “And once you had 10 friends, you had enough content in your newsfeed that there would just be stuff on a good enough interval where it would be worth coming back to the site.” Facebook would design its site for new arrivals so that it was all about finding people to “friend.”

The 10 friends rule is an example of a favored manipulation of tech companies, the network effect. People will use your service — as lame as it may be — if others use your service. This was tautological reasoning that nonetheless proved true: If everyone is on Facebook, then everyone is on Facebook. You need to do whatever it takes to keep people logging in, and if rivals emerge, they must be crushed or, if stubbornly resilient, acquired.

As is becoming obvious, these companies do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. We need greater regulation, even if it impedes the introduction of new services. If we can’t stop their proposals — if we can’t say that driverless cars may not be a worthy goal, to give just one example — then are we in control of our society? We need to break up these online monopolies because if a few people make the decisions about how we communicate, shop, learn the news, again, do we control our own society?

#Silicon_valley #Cyberlibertariens #Google #Facebook #Economie_attention #Médias_sociaux

[Forum] | Trump : A Resister’s Guide | Harper’s Magazine - Part 11
▻https://harpers.org/archive/2017/02/trump-a-resisters-guide/11

http://harpers.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/HA037__2VP70-1.png

y Kate Crawford

Dear Technologists:

For the past decade, you’ve told us that your products will change the world, and indeed they have. We carry tiny networked computers with us everywhere, we control “smart” home appliances at a remove, we communicate with our friends and family over online platforms, and now we are all part of the vast Muslim registry known as Facebook. Almost 80 percent of American internet users belong to the social network, and many of them happily offer up their religious affiliation. The faith of those who don’t, too, can be easily deduced with a little data-science magic; in 2013, a Cambridge University study accurately detected Muslims 82 percent of the time, using only their Facebook likes. The industry has only become better at individual targeting since then.

You’ve created simple, elegant tools that allow us to disseminate news in real time. Twitter, for example, is very good at this. It’s also a prodigious disinformation machine. Trolls, fake news, and hate speech thrived on the platform during the presidential campaign, and they show few signs of disappearing now. Twitter has likewise made it easier to efficiently map the networks of activists and political dissenters. For every proud hashtag — #BlackLivesMatter, #ShoutYourAbortion, the anti-deportation campaign #Not1More — there are data sets that reveal the identities of the “influencers” and “joiners” and offer a means of tracking, harassing, and silencing them.

You may intend to resist, but some requests will leave little room for refusal. Last year, the U.S. government forced Yahoo to scan all its customers’ incoming emails, allegedly to find a set of characters that were related to terrorist activity. Tracking emails is just the beginning, of course, and the FBI knows it. The most important encryption case to date hinged on the FBI’s demand that Apple create a bespoke operating system that would allow the government to intentionally undermine user security whenever it impeded an investigation. Apple won the fight, but that was when Obama was in office. Trump’s regime may pressure the technology sector to create back doors in all its products, widen surveillance, and weaken the security of every networked phone, vehicle, and thermostat.

There is precedent for technology companies assisting authoritarian regimes. In 1880, after watching a train conductor punch tickets, Herman Hollerith, a young employee of the U.S. Census Bureau, was inspired to design a punch-card system to catalogue human traits. The Hollerith Machine was used in the 1890 census to tabulate markers such as race, literacy level, gender, and country of origin. During the 1930s, the Third Reich used the same system, under the direction of a German subsidiary of International Business Machines, to identify Jews and other ethnic groups. Thomas J. Watson, IBM’s first president, received a medal from Hitler for his services. As Edwin Black recounts in IBM and the Holocaust, there was both profit and glory to be had in providing the computational services for rounding up the state’s undesirables. Within the decade, IBM served as the information subcontractor for the U.S. government’s Japanese-internment camps.

You, the software engineers and leaders of technology companies, face an enormous responsibility. You know better than anyone how best to protect the millions who have entrusted you with their data, and your knowledge gives you real power as civic actors. If you want to transform the world for the better, here is your moment. Inquire about how a platform will be used. Encrypt as much as you can. Oppose the type of data analysis that predicts people’s orientation, religion, and political preferences if they did not willingly offer that information. Reduce the quantity of personal information that is kept. And when the unreasonable demands come, the demands that would put activists, lawyers, journalists, and entire communities at risk, resist wherever you can. History also keeps a file.

#Silicon_valley #Fichage #Médias_sociaux #Chiffrement #Ethique

Your Data is Being Manipulated – Data & Society : Points
►https://points.datasociety.net/your-data-is-being-manipulated-a7e31a83577b

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1200/1*oHDPCT-NJGwG5RUQH_u2Rg.jpeg

Fast forward to 2003, when the sitting Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum publicly compared homosexuality to bestiality and pedophilia. Needless to say, the LGBT community was outraged. Journalist Dan Savage called on his readers to find a way to “memorialize the scandal.” One of his fans created a website to associate Santorum’s name with anal sex. To the senator’s horror, countless members of the public jumped in to link to that website in an effort to influence search engines. This form of crowdsourced SEO is commonly referred to as “Google bombing,” and it’s a form of media manipulation intended to mess with data and the information landscape.

At this moment, AI is at the center of every business conversation. Companies, governments, and researchers are obsessed with data. Not surprisingly, so are adversarial actors. We are currently seeing an evolution in how data is being manipulated. If we believe that data can and should be used to inform people and fuel technology, we need to start building the infrastructure necessary to limit the corruption and abuse of that data — and grapple with how biased and problematic data might work its way into technology and, through that, into the foundations of our society.

Like search engines, social media introduced a whole new target for manipulation. This attracted all sorts of people, from social media marketers to state actors. Messing with Twitter’s trending topics or Facebook’s news feed became a hobby for many. For $5, anyone could easily buy followers, likes, and comments on almost every major site. The economic and political incentives are obvious, but alongside these powerful actors, there are also a whole host of people with less-than-obvious intentions coordinating attacks on these systems.

The goal with a story like that isn’t to convince journalists that it’s true, but to get them to foolishly use their amplification channels to negate it. This produces a “Boomerang effect,” whereby those who don’t trust the media believe that there must be merit to the conspiracy, prompting some to “self-investigate.”

Consider, for example, the role of reddit and Twitter data as training data. Computer scientists have long pulled from the very generous APIs of these companies to train all sorts of models, trying to understand natural language, develop metadata around links, and track social patterns. They’ve trained models to detect depression, rank news, and engage in conversation. Ignoring the fact that this data is not representative in the first place, most engineers who use these APIs believe that it’s possible to clean the data and remove all problematic content. I can promise you it’s not.

I’m watching countless actors experimenting with ways to mess with public data with an eye on major companies’ systems. They are trying to fly below the radar. If you don’t have a structure in place for strategically grappling with how those with an agenda might try to route around your best laid plans, you’re vulnerable. This isn’t about accidental or natural content. It’s not even about culturally biased data. This is about strategically gamified content injected into systems by people who are trying to guess what you’ll do.

If you are building data-driven systems, you need to start thinking about how that data can be corrupted, by whom, and for what purpose.

L’article est si intéressant qu’il faut faire attention à ne pas le copier en entier ici ;-)

#danah_boyd #Machine_learning #médias_sociaux #data #fake_news

Apps stirring up trouble in schools - Salon.com
▻https://www.salon.com/2017/09/30/apps-stirring-up-trouble-in-schools_partner

https://media.salon.com/2017/02/sexless-millennials.jpg

How certain apps become popular with kids is a bit of a mystery. The best ones mix all the stuff tweens and teens love – gossiping, hanging out, clowning around, and meeting other kids – with an X factor that makes them go viral. Once an app gains critical mass (like, when every kid in school is on it), that’s when the real fun begins. But that’s where things can go wrong, too.

Check out some of the apps that can potentially stir up drama in schools.

C’est moi qui souligne... Suit une description et une classification des apps. Tendance à confondre app et pratiques. Mais c’est belle liste des « potentiels » problèmes, qui reste à la limite des paniques morales, quoique.

#Médias_sociaux #Pratiques_numériques #Cyberbullying #Cyberharcèlement #Anonymat #Live_vidéo #Adolescents #Panique_morale

Undercover With the Alt-Right - The New York Times
▻https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/19/opinion/alt-right-white-supremacy-undercover.html

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/09/19/opinion/still1/still1-facebookJumbo.jpg

Last September, Patrik Hermansson, a 25-year-old graduate student from Sweden, went undercover in the world of the extreme right. Posing as a student writing a thesis about the suppression of right-wing speech, he traveled from London to New York to Charlottesville, Va. — and into the heart of a dangerous movement that is experiencing a profound rejuvenation.

Mr. Hermansson, who was sent undercover by the British anti-racist watchdog group Hope Not Hate, spent months insinuating himself into the alt-right, using his Swedish nationality (many neo-Nazis are obsessed with Sweden because of its “Nordic” heritage) as a way in. It wasn’t always easy. “You want to punch them in the face,” he told me of the people he met undercover. “You want to scream and do whatever — leave. But you can’t do any of those things. You have to sit and smile.”

What he learned while undercover is one part of a shocking, comprehensive new report from Hope Not Hate that sheds light on the strange landscape of the alt-right, the much discussed, little understood and largely anonymous far-right movement that exists mostly online and that has come to national attention in part because of its support for Donald Trump.

The extreme alt-right are benefiting immensely from the energy being produced by a more moderate — but still far-right — faction known as the “alt-light.”

The alt-light promotes a slightly softer set of messages. Its figures — such as Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson and Mike Cernovich — generally frame their work as part of an effort to defend “the West” or “Western culture” against supposed left-liberal dominance, rather than making explicitly racist appeals. Many of them, in fact, have renounced explicit racism and anti-Semitism, though they will creep up to the line of explicitly racist speech, especially when Islam and immigration are concerned.

According to researchers, the key to hooking new recruits into any movement, and to getting them increasingly involved over time, is to simply give them activities to participate in. This often precedes any deep ideological commitment on the recruits’ part and, especially early on, is more about offering them a sense of meaning and community than anything else.

Intentionally or not, the far right has deftly applied these insights to the online world. Viewed through the filters of alt-light outlets like Breitbart and Prison Planet, or through Twitter feeds like Mr. Watson’s, the world is a horror show of crimes by migrants, leftist censorship and attacks on common sense. And the best, easiest way to fight back is through social media.

The newly initiated are offered many opportunities to participate directly. A teenager in a suburban basement can join a coordinated global effort to spread misinformation about Emmanuel Macron, France’s centrist president, in the hopes of helping far-right leader Marine Le Pen. Anyone who wants to do so can help spread the word about supposed mainstream media censorship of the Muslim “crime wave” the far right says is ravaging Europe.

These efforts — a click, a retweet, a YouTube comment — come to feel like important parts of an epochal struggle. The far right, once hemmed in by its own parochialism, has manufactured a worldwide online battlefield anyone with internet access can step into.

#Alt_right #Extrême_droite #Médias_sociaux #Post_truth

Journal Electronique
▻http://www.lemonde.fr/journalelectronique/donnees/protege/20170914/html/1289803.html

Il existe une différence culturelle entre l’Europe et les Etats-Unis, concernant l’étendue de la liberté d’expression et la nécessité de l’encadrer par la loi. Nous pensons -souvent en -Europe que cet encadrement est nécessaire, mais nous peinons à adapter nos -législations. Par exemple, -depuis un an, -l’Allemagne menace Facebook de voter une loi pour l’obliger à durcir sa politique de modération. Selon vous, cette approche est-elle efficace pour parvenir à faire -bouger les géants du Web ?

Je crains que cela n’ait surtout des conséquences imprévisibles. Faire pression pour rendre des acteurs privés, comme Facebook, responsables de la censure transforme de fait ces acteurs privés en censeurs, qui n’ont de comptes à rendre à personne. L’Europe fait face à une pression migratoire extraordinaire, en partie due à l’activisme militaire américain dans le monde, et notamment à la déstabilisation du Moyen-Orient qu’il contribue à provoquer. S’il y a une solution, elle doit surtout chercher à résoudre les causes géopolitiques qui mènent à la prolifération du discours de haine.

Comme nombre de médias, « Le Monde » travaille depuis quelques mois avec -Facebook ou First Draft, une organisation proche de Google, à mettre en place -des initiatives visant à vérifier les rumeurs qui circulent sur les réseaux. Que pensez-vous de ces -collaborations ?

C’est très bien. Mais cela fonctionnera-t-il ? Je ne sais pas. Si les médias deviennent l’ennemi, comme c’est en train de devenir le cas aux Etats-Unis, je ne suis pas certain que ces mêmes médias aient les moyens d’être la solution.

#Lawrence_Lessig #Post_truth #Médias_sociaux

Webtv de l’Université de Nantes - Olivier Ertzscheid - Comment lutter contre la haine sur Internet ?
▻http://webtv.univ-nantes.fr/fiche/10134/olivier-ertzscheid-comment-lutter-contre-la-haine-sur-internet

http://videos.univ-nantes.fr/_imgs/medias/wvga/imgm10134.jpg

200.456 insultes en un jour, soit plus de deux mots d’oiseaux par seconde. C’est le résultat d’une étude inédite, baptisée « 24 heures de haine sur Internet » et réalisée par l’agence d’analyse du web Kantar Media du vendredi 22 janvier 2017 à 18h au samedi 23 janvier 2017 à la même heure. Un jour comme les autres sur la Toile. Et un chiffre qui en dit long sur l’étalage de haine qui se déverse en permanence sur Internet. Et encore, c’est certainement bien pire en réalité. Car l’étude s’est concentrée seulement sur les commentaires publics, postés sur les sites, blogs, forums et réseaux sociaux les plus populaires, laissant de côté les commentaires privés et de nombreux autres sites. De plus, les insultes racistes ou antisémites, qui représentent une grande part des propos injurieux, n’ont pas été pris en compte par l’agence (La Tribune-6 février 2016). Olivier Ertzscheid, chercheur en sciences de l’information et de la communication, dans le cadre de l’Observatoire des médias de l’université permanente, le thème : Comment lutter contre la haine sur internet ?

#Olivier_Ertzscheid #Médias_sociaux #Haine

Débat en ligne : « Quand des personnes de même avis ne parlent qu’entre elles, elles ont tendance à se radicaliser »
▻http://abonnes.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2017/08/03/debat-en-ligne-quand-des-personnes-de-meme-avis-ne-parlent-qu-entre-

http://img.lemde.fr/2017/08/02/189/0/2061/1030/644/322/60/0/92bae11_7281-mevyvo.2tjbmaemi.jpg

L’idée du « Daily Me » décrit un phénomène propre à Internet par lequel chacun d’entre nous peut créer son propre univers de communication, peut choisir ce qu’il souhaite lire, entendre ou voir à tout moment. Si vous ne souhaitez vous intéresser qu’à un seul enjeu, par exemple l’immigration clandestine, et les dangers qu’elle soulève, ou encore sur Voltaire, et combien il était intelligent, vous pouvez le faire. Une telle personnalisation semble séduisante de premier abord et, d’une certaine façon, elle étend notre liberté. Après tout, avons-nous vraiment envie d’être confrontés à des points de vue que nous rejetons, ou de nous intéresser à des sujets qui nous ennuient ?

Le problème, c’est que la démocratie et la liberté exigent que l’on soit aussi exposé à des expériences que nous n’avons pas présélectionnées ou prévues – mais aussi des expériences que nous partageons avec d’autres. Cela implique de s’intéresser à ce que les autres pensent, de découvrir des problématiques qui nous sont étrangères

Vous craignez également ce que vous nommez les « chambres d’écho » créées par des communautés d’internautes…

Vous vivez dans une chambre d’écho quand vous n’êtes exposé qu’à un seul point de vue, ou aux mêmes sempiternelles questions. Nous savons bienque Staline et Hitler ont créé des chambres d’écho. De ce que j’en sais, la Corée du Nord est une énorme chambre d’écho. Or aujourd’hui, les technologies modernes de communication et les réseaux sociaux nous permettent de créer par nous mêmes nos propres chambres d’écho, en se concentrant par exemple sur un seul enjeu politique.

Le recours au hashtag peut accentuer, dites-vous, certaines tendances néfastes des réseaux sociaux. Pour quelle raison ?

J’aime les hashtags ! Ils ont une grande utilité, car ils permettent d’organiser la discussion en ligne et qu’ils simplifient la vie. En tapant dans le champ de recherche #Macron ou #StarWars, ou #BlackLivesMatter vous accédez plus rapidement et plus facilement à des contenus qui vous intéressent. Mais les mots-dièse peuvent aussi servir à se retrancher dans une chambre d’écho. Certains internautes les utilisent pour construire des niches politiques facilement identifiables, et peuvent donc grâce à eux interagir plus facilement avec des gens qui pensent la même chose qu’eux. La radicalisation et l’extrémisme trouvent dans le hashtag un nouvel outil de propagation.

#Post_Truth #Médias_sociaux #Chambre_Echo

“Developing dissident knowledges”: Geert Lovink on the Social Media Abyss | P2P Foundation
▻https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/developing-dissident-knowledges-geert-lovink-social-media-abyss/2017/07/12

https://cdn8-blog.p2pfoundation.net/wp-content/uploads/12754869184_78ec2629f0_b_zuckerberg-world-mobile.jpg

The closest comparison that we have today to the New Soviet Man is perhaps the cult to the cyberlibertarian entrepreneur of Silicon Valley. We are now used to thirty-somethings in sweaters telling us, from the ping-pong tables in their offices, that the only road to success —both personal and collective— lies in technology. To oppose them is no easy task: who is going to question a discourse that has innovation and “the common good” at its core? But the internet today hardly resembles the technology that, in its origins, seemed to promise a source of decentralization, democratization and citizen empowerment. Nowadays, the giants of Silicon Valley —lead by Facebook and Google— have mutated towards a monopolistic economic model and flirt with intelligence agencies for the exchange of their precious data.

Lovink shares the “healthy scepticism” of Rendueles when elaborating what we could call an “Internet critical theory”. In Social Media Abyss, he inaugurates the post-Snowden era — “the secular version of God is Dead”— as the beginning of a general disillusionment with the development of the internet: now we can say that the internet “has become almost everything no one wanted it to be”. But even though we know that everything we do online may be used against us, we still click, share and rate whatever appears on our screen. Can we look at the future with optimism? Or are we too alienated, too precarized, too desocialized (despite being constantly “connected”) to design alternatives? In the words of Lovink, “what is citizen empowerment in the age of driver-less cars”?

Interview de Geert Lovink

And when I say ordinary I mean very ordinary. If you look at the general strategy, especially of Facebook, the target is this last billion, which is comprised of people really far under poverty levels. When we’re talking about the average internet user, we are not talking about affluent, middle-class, people anymore. This is really something to keep in mind, because we need to shed this old idea that the internet is an elitist technology, that the computers were once in the hands of the few, that the smartphone is a status symbol, etc. We are really talking about an average user that is basically under the new regime of the one percent, really struggling to keep afloat, to stay alive.

So when I say invisibility, I mean that this growing group of people (and we’re talking about billions across continents) are forced to integrate the internet in their everyday struggles. This is what makes it very, very serious. We’re not talking about luxury problems anymore. This is a problem of people that have to fight for their economic survival, but also have to be bothered with their privacy.

Yes, it feels like now it’s all measured by followers, even social movements.

Exactly, we cannot distinguish the social movement from the followers anymore. This is the trap we are in at the moment, so in a way we have to go back to a new understanding of smaller networks, or cells, or groups. It is no surprise that many people are now talking of going towards a new localism, because the easiest way to build these smaller groups is to focus on the local environment. But that’s not necessarily what I have in mind: I can also imagine smaller, trans-local networks.

There is another consideration we can make. I understand that Pierre Lévy says we should use the existing technologies more efficiently. But obviously other people say we can only use the social media that exist now in a more emancipatory way if these platforms are socialized, if we really take over their ownership. That is a very interesting and radical proposition that other people have started to work on. What if we take those social media very seriously, so seriously that they become part of the public utilities? This is an interesting development in which you don’t emphasize so much on the alternatives or the conceptual level.

#Médias_sociaux #Geert_Lovink #Politique_numérique

Refroidissement Social : Quand Le Big Data Pousse Les Internautes À L’Autocensure | Forbes France
▻https://www.forbes.fr/technologie/refroidissement-social-cooling-big-data-internautes-autocensure

https://www.forbes.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/social-cooling.jpg

Inquiets de leur réputation numérique – et de la revente de leurs données – les internautes pratiqueraient de plus en plus une forme d’autocensure. Ce nouveau concept est qualifié de « social cooling » ou « refroidissement social » par le chercheur hollandais Tijman Shep. Il pourrait conduire à une société uniformisée, allergique à la prise de risques.

Le phénomène fonctionne en trois temps : la récolte des données par des “data-brockers”, la prise de conscience par l’internaute que ses données peuvent se retourner contre lui, enfin, l’autocensure.

#traçage #médias_sociaux #surveillance #vie_privée

A Hambourg, les anti-G20 informent, s’organisent et se mobilisent en ligne
▻http://abonnes.lemonde.fr/international/article/2017/07/07/a-hambourg-les-anti-g20-informent-s-organisent-et-se-mobilisent-auss

http://img.lemde.fr/2017/07/07/122/0/3600/1798/644/322/60/0/9456a6e_23961-1cv66ou.j0pugzaor.jpg

Affrontements filmés en direct, couchsurfing chez des militants, partage de la position des policiers… Le mouvement de protestation est aussi sur la Toile.

#Médias_sociaux #Mobilisation

How Facebook Sees the World - Pacific Standard
▻https://psmag.com/news/how-facebook-sees-the-world

https://psmag.com/.image/t_share/MTQ3MzM4ODg5NTk2NTExNTA5/sticker-mule-199257.jpg

“Fake news” became the media’s favorite electoral boogeyman during the presidential election, and with good reason: Researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University found that Facebook and Twitter indeed precipitated an unprecedented level of misinformation, creating what the Columbia Journalism Review called a “media network anchored around Breitbart developed as a distinct and insulated media system, using social media as a backbone to transmit a hyper-partisan perspective to the world.” Research confirms that the wave of anti-establishment fake news that came crashing down on social media users in the months leading up to the election is very real.

Facebook’s old existential crisis appears over: By necessity, it is a publisher rather than simply a technology company—and it needs editors.

But this poses an interesting question: How does Facebook see the world? The company says its mission is to “give people the power to share and make the world more open and connected.” But it’s far from a neutral platform. In addition to individual products like its much-maligned “Trending News” module, which has vacillated from left-leaning editorial node to hoax whisperer, the platform’s fundamental design subtly shapes our behavior and, in turn, the structure of the digital social relations that reflect and augment our real-life ones, from the media we share to the “filter bubbles” we build for ourselves.

The full corpus of the Guardian’s “Facebook Files” offers a fascinating look at how a technology company long in denial of its editorial responsibilities is suddenly grappling with its new role as the largest de facto censor of information on the planet, one that reportedly deals with more than 6.5 million reports regarding allegedly fake accounts each week. “Facebook cannot keep control of its content,” one company employee told the Guardian. “It has grown too big, too quickly.”

This, in some ways, may mark the beginning of the end of Facebook as a somewhat unfiltered reflection of our “real” social and political worlds—and, in turn, our best and worst impulses. Facebook has become “the most powerful mobilizing force in politics, fast replacing television as the most consequential entertainment medium,” as Farhad Manjoo wrote for the New York Times Magazine in April. “But over the course of 2016, Facebook’s gargantuan influence became its biggest liability.” Now all-powerful, Facebook has adopted the unilateral policing power of a state—a power that may one day control flow of information at the behest of government

#Facebook #médias_sociaux #censure #fake_news

Qui sont les nouveaux influenceurs numériques ?
▻https://theconversation.com/qui-sont-les-nouveaux-influenceurs-numeriques-75964

https://cdn.theconversation.com/files/165835/width1356x668/image-20170419-6392-vidxlq.jpg

Nous pouvons définir un e-influenceur ou influenceur digital comme un internaute qui détient une certaine capacité à mobiliser et à générer des actions vis-à-vis de sa communauté. Cet influenceur est reconnu comme disposant d’un espace de parole et surtout d’écoute sur Internet. Il y a une dizaine d’années, seuls quelques bloggeurs étaient considérés comme tels, mais le développement des réseaux sociaux a permis d’élargir le spectre de l’influence digitale.

#influence #médias_sociaux

Twitter, Facebook, YouTube et l’extension du domaine du débat public
▻http://theconversation.com/twitter-facebook-youtube-et-lextension-du-domaine-du-debat-public-7

https://cdn.theconversation.com/files/167682/width1356x668/file-20170503-21620-gixdg2.jpg

Bousculant tous les formats de communication politique, confisquant souvent le débat grâce à une parfaite maîtrise des codes numériques, Jean‑Luc Mélenchon se sera en quelque mois imposé comme « le » Youtubeur politique le plus « successfull » de France. Fraternisant avec Squeezie sur Twitter (un des plus gros Youtubers français près de 9 millions d’abonnés et plus de 3 milliards de vues sur ses vidéos), copain du strasbourgeois Ludo, influenceur politique de poids auprès de la génération Y grâce à sa chaîne de décryptage politique « osonscauser ».

Grâce à une équipe pouvant notamment compter sur 5 000 bénévoles entièrement dédiés à Facebook et 3 000 dévolus à Twitter, l’équipe numérique d’Emmanuelle Macron aura eu pour principal objectif durant cette campagne de déjouer les rumeurs, parer les attaques des hackers comme Fancy Bears, traquer les fake news sur 4chan notamment.

Également très présent sur tous les médias traditionnels, la problématique d’Emmanuel Macron aura surtout été d’utiliser les réseaux pour structurer sa campagne, recruter des bénévoles, créer de l’engagement autour de son mouvement En Marche !, tout en contrôlant son e-réputation.

Marine Le Pen, elle aussi très active sur les réseaux sociaux (et seule aux manettes de son compte Twitter), aura pu compter sur l’appui d’une fachosphère très structurée et implantée de longue date sur toutes les plateformes de Twitter à Facebook jusqu’à… jeuxvideo.com (tiens donc…) et son forum 18-25 tristement nommé et parfois tristement célèbre pour ses dérapages, défouloir à haters de toutes sortes.

Ainsi les réseaux sociaux s’ils sont de formidables outils pour véhiculer des idées et fédérer des communautés montreraient leurs limites dans la vie réelle. C’est ce qu’on appelle notamment « l’effet meeting » : une ardeur en vase clos, à ne pas confondre ou transposer avec ce qui se passe « in IRL » c-à-d. dans la vraie vie. Comme on ne confond pas un fan venu assister à un meeting avec l’électorat qui reste à conquérir pour sortir vainqueur d’une élection.

#médias_sociaux #élections

Why Instagram Is Becoming Facebook’s Next Facebook - The New York Times
▻https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/technology/why-instagram-is-becoming-facebooks-next-facebook.html

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/04/27/technology/27state-illo/27state-illo-facebookJumbo.jpg

Instagram has thus triggered an echo — it feels like Facebook. More precisely, it feels the way Facebook did from 2009 to 2012, when it silently crossed over from one of those tech things that some people sometimes did to one of those tech things that everyone you know does every day.

But last year, you might have said there was a question whether a picture-based service like Instagram could have reached similar scale — whether it was universal enough, whether there were enough people whose phones could handle it, whether it could survive greater competition from newer photo networks like Snapchat. Maybe those problems or others will rear up in the future, and growth could yet stall. But for now, Instagram seems to have overcome any perceived hurdles. It seems to have reached escape velocity.

Other bottlenecks involved technical fixes. More than 80 percent of Instagram’s users are now outside the United States, and the service is growing especially quickly in parts of Asia and South America that are dogged by underpowered Android phones and slow cellular networks. (Snapchat, for example, has had trouble with Android performance.) A huge part of Instagram’s engineering efforts are thus devoted to making its Android app work better outside the United States. For instance, after Instagram began Stories — the video-slide show feature it took from Snapchat — it spent a month adding speed improvements for international markets.

#Médias_sociaux #Instagram

The Platform Press : How Silicon Valley reengineered #journalism - Columbia Journalism Review via @opironet
▻https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/platform-press-how-silicon-valley-reengineered-journalism.php

Avec une chronologie bien dense à la fin.

2000

October 23: Google AdWords launches.

2002

October 4—21: Harvard study finds 113 white nationalist, Nazi, anti-Semitic, and radical Islamic sites, and at least one fundamentalist Christian site, were removed from French and German Google listings.

2004

February 2: Facebook launches as a Harvard-only social network.

2006

January 23: Google News formally launches; had been in beta since September 2002.
January 25: Google launches Google.cn, adhering to China’s censorship policies until March 2010.
July 15: Twttr (later renamed Twitter) is released. “Tweets” can only be 140 characters.
September 5: Facebook News Feed launches and displays activity from a user’s network.
September 10: Google delists Inquisition21, a website seeking to challenge potentially incorrect child pornography convictions in the UK. Google implies the delisting is because Inquisition21 tried to manipulate search results.

2007

January 10: Facebook launches mobile site m.facebook.com.
April 16: Google’s Terms of Service unveiled, including provisions granting Google “perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which [users] submit, post or display on or through, the Services.”

2008

October 7: Apple launches iOS App Store.
October 22: Android OS Google Play store launches.
December 30: Facebook removes a photo of a mother breastfeeding babies, leading to protests.

2009

February 4: Facebook’s Terms of Service altered to remove the automatic expiry of Facebook’s license to use individuals’ names, likenesses, and images if an account was deleted.
February 24: WhatsApp, a mobile messaging app company, is founded, and the app is released in May of 2009.

2010

January 14: Links to Encyclopedia Dramatica’s “Aboriginal” article removed from Google after complaint; Google defended decision on grounds that the content represented a violation of Australia’s Racial Discrimination Act.
March 22: Google announces it will no longer adhere to Chinese censorship policies by redirecting Chinese users to its Hong Kong domain.
October 6: Instagram, a photo-based social network, is released.
October 21: News Corporation axes “Project Alesia,” a potential competitor to Google News, over concerns about cost and readiness of proposed partners.

2011

September 26: Snapchat, a mobile app for disappearing messages, is released.
October 12: iOS Apple Newsstand app to read a variety of publications is released.
November 2: Twitter begins to “curate” results on its timeline.

2012

February 16: Facebook’s internal “Abuse Standards” leaked, including policy to filter out content containing images of maps of Kurdistan and of burning Turkish flags.
March 1: Fundamental rewrite of Google’s Terms of Service, adding rights for Google to “use, host, [and] store” any content submitted by users.
April 9: Facebook buys Instagram for $1 billion.
May 31: Google launches a feature that informs Chinese users which keywords are censored. (The feature is removed in early December.)

2013

January 19: After backlash, Instagram scales back earlier announcement on changing Terms of Use to allow for selling user data.
June 20: Announcement that video is coming to Instagram
October 1: Canadian photographer Petra Collins’ Instagram account deleted because of a selfie which displayed visible pubic hair beneath her bikini bottom; challenged by Collins as it did not break Instagram’s terms.
October 3: Snapchat Stories, a compilation of “snaps” a user’s friends see, launches.
November 11: Update to Google’s Terms of Service, clarifying how profile name and photo might appear in Google products.
November 20: Android OS Google Play Newsstand app to read a variety of publications launches.

2014

January 30: Facebook launches Paper, an effort at personalized news, and Trending.
February 19: WhatsApp bought by Facebook for $19 billion.
April 1: Algorithm introduced on Instagram to tailor the “Explore”/“Popular” tab to each user.
April 14: Update to Google’s Terms of Service, including provision to automatically analyze content such as emails when content is sent, received, and stored.
April 24: Launch of Facebook Newswire, powered by Storyful. While it was eventually folded, it allowed publishers to embed “newsworthy” content from Facebook into own material, use platform for newsgathering and storytelling.
May 19: In Russia, Twitter blocks pro-Ukrainian accounts following threats to bar the service if it did not delete tweets violating Russian law.
May 30: Google launches tool that enables Europeans to request “right to be forgotten” in response to ruling by European Court of Justice.
June 13: Google ordered by Canadian court to remove search results that linked to websites of Datalink, which sold technology alleged to have been stolen from a competitor.
June 17: Snapchat Our Story, a public Story aggregating many users’ activity around an event launches.
June 23: Facebook News Feed algorithm altered to increase priority of video.
July 15: Geofilters on Snapchat are released.
July 25: Twitter blocks an account belonging to @boltai, a hacker collective that leaked internal Kremlin documents.
August 25: Facebook News Feed algorithm altered to reduce priority of clickbait.
October 22: German publishers concede defeat to Google in long-running dispute over attempt to charge license fees.
December 18: Google removes links to articles that criticized Australian organization Universal Medicine, an alleged cult.

2015

January 12: Instagram deletes account of Australian photo and fashion agency due to a photograph with pubic hair outside bikini bottoms. (Account reactivated January 21.)
January 20: Facebook News Feed algorithm altered to “show fewer hoaxes.”
January 21: WhatsApp Web launches.
January 27: Snapchat Discover launches. Selected publishers create a daily Discover channel, like a mini interactive magazine with an advertising revenue split arrangement where publishers can sell for 70 percent of revenue, or let Snapchat sell for 50 percent.
March 3: Instagram carousel ads launch.
March 9: Twitter acquires live streaming app Periscope.
March 31: Twitter rolls out Curator, which allows publishers to search and display tweets based on hashtags, keywords, location, and other specific details.
April 13: Snapchat gets rid of brand stories, also known as sponsored stories, after six months.
April 21: Facebook tweaks News Feed to emphasize family and friends because people are worried about “missing important updates.”
April 27: Snapchat hires Peter Hamby from CNN and announces plans to hire more journalists for the election.
April 27: Google announces Digital News Initiative with eight European publishers.
May 7: Facebook releases internal research on filter bubbles that finds “most people have friends who claim an opposing political ideology, and that the content in peoples’ News Feeds reflect those diverse views.”
May 7: Snapchat will charge advertisers 2 cents per view for ten second ads in between Discover slides (up to four slots) and during videos. This plan is called Two Pennies. It was previously 15 cents.
May 12: Facebook announces Instant Articles, faster loading articles on Facebook for iPhone,and original launch partners. Ads are embedded in article, and there is a 70/30 revenue share with publishers if Facebook sells the ad.
June 8: Apple News app announced to replace the Newsstand app. Like Facebook Instant Articles, a 70/30 revenue share with publishers if Apple sells ads against their content.
June 15: Facebook’s News Feed algorithm updated to prioritize time spent on a story above engagement.
June 22: Google News Lab announced to support technological collaborations with journalists.
June 23: Instagram changes Explore to allow users to follow real-time news more easily by sorting by location and recency.
July 1: Automatic bans imposed on Facebook accounts using an offensive slang term for Russians. Similar Russian insults towards Ukrainians (such as ‘hohol’) were not deleted.
July 27: Snapchat axes Yahoo! and Warner Music from Discover, replaces them with BuzzFeed and iHeartRadio.
Late July: Snapchat’s ad team starts selling against Discover.
August 5: Facebook Live video launches for public figures.
August 27: Snapchat Discover expands from 12 to 15 partners. In the past, they cut old partners to add new ones so all 12 fit on one screen.
September 9: Using the Facebook ad platform technology, Instagram’s advertising platform expands globally, allows for more targeting and ad format flexibility.
September 22: Facebook allows publishers to create Instant Articles in their own content management systems.
September 23: Facebook releases 360 video. Users can move their phones for a spherical view within a video.
October 6: Twitter Moments, curated tweets around top stories, launches.
October 7: Google announces Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP) project, which will allow publishers’ stories to load more quickly from search results.
October 21: Twitter announces partnerships with firms such as Spredfast, Wayin, Dataminr, ScribbleLive, and Flowics at its developer conference.
October 22: Google announces it has signed up over 120 news organizations for its Digital News Initiative, including the BBC, The Economist, and Der Spiegel.
October 27: Twitter announces it will discontinue video-sharing app Vine.
October 28: Snapchat Terms of Service updated: requests right to reproduce, modify, republish, and save users’ photos, specifically in relation to Live Stories.
October 29: Instagram allows businesses to use Facebook’s Ads Manager and to run campaigns across Facebook and Instagram.
October 31: Instagram conducts its first video curation for Halloween.
November 10: Instagram partner program launches; a group of 40 adtech, content marketing, and community management companies that work to help businesses on Instagram.
November 11: Facebook Notify, a real-time notification news app, is launched.
November 13: Snapchat launches Official Stories, Stories from verified brands or influencers.
November 23: Snapchat launches Story Explorer, which allows users to focus on a specific moment from a story, but from additional users and perspectives.
November 30: Snapchat allows publishers to deep link back to Snapchat content from elsewhere, like other social platforms.
December 3: Facebook releases Live video to the public.
December 9: Facebook tweaks News Feed so it works with poor connections, like 2G. Facebook also allows publishers to sell Instant Article ad campaigns instead of having to make those ads part of their own site package, to have one ad for every 350 words of an Instant Article (up from one ad per 500 words), and to control link outs at bottom of Instant Articles.
December 2: Snapchat makes a Story for live/breaking news during San Bernardino.
December 9: Google announces AMP rollout timeline; pages will go live in February.
December 15: German government strikes deal with outlets who agree to delete hate speech from their sites within 24 hours, in response to increasing racism online.

2016

January 5: Digiday reports that Snapchat, up to 23 Discover partners, is rumored to be building their own ad interface API, like Facebook, to target ads to users instead of publications.
January 11: Instagram publishes its first live video curation for the Golden Globes.
January 19: Nielsen expands Twitter TV Ratings to include Facebook conversations around TV shows, called Social Content Ratings.
January 21: Facebook opens Audience Optimization to publishers to target specific readers.
January 26: The Facebook Audience Network can be used by publishers to sell ads on their mobile sites.
January 26: Apple plans to make subscription-only content available in the News app; publishers can only post free articles or excerpts that drive people to subscribe.
January 27: Facebook reveals forthcoming “reactions” in the US, which had already been tested elsewhere in the world.
January 28: Facebook Live expands to all iPhone users.
January 28: Snapchat launches a show called “Good Luck America” with Peter Hamby.
February 4: WhatsApp increases group chat user limit to 256 people, aiming to increase enterprise appeal, including to publishers.
February 9: Google AMP announces solutions for subscription-supported publications, and Adobe Analytics integration.
February 10: Twitter changes algorithm to make sure users see tweets they are likely to care about.
February 10: On Instagram, publishers can now see video views and can do account switching. Instagram hits 200,000 advertisers, and 75 percent are outside of the US.
February 12: Reports that Snapchat will let users subscribe to Discover channels and that it will go from logo button to magazine cover look by May.
February 24: Google AMP articles go live.
February 25: Snapchat partners with Nielsen Digital Ad Ratings to measure, transparently, the effectiveness of ad campaigns.
February 26: Facebook Live rolled out to all Android users.
February 28: Snapchat Live Stories, beginning with the Oscars, will be viewable on the web for special occasions.
March 1: Facebook changes algorithm to prioritize Live Video, especially Live video that is broadcasting.
March 15: Instagram announces that starting in May users’ feeds will be algorithmically driven, instead of real-time.
March 15: Apple News app opens to all publishers.
March 24: On Facebook, publishers can see daily activity around a video.
March 29: Snapchat Terms of Service updated to add the potential to incorporate third-party links and search results in Snapchat services.
March 31: Facebook creates option for publishers to autoplay and non-autoplay video ads in Instant; can have pre-roll video ads in any editorial video; and can have one more ad unit at the base of articles.
April 5: Twitter announces live video deal to stream NFL games, and begins pushing for live video deals with publishers.
April 7: Facebook allows Live Video within groups and events, live reactions from viewers, live filters, the ability to watch live with friends, a live map, and also live video in trending and search.
April 8: Branded content will be allowed as Facebook Instant Articles with the sponsor tagged.
April 12: Facebook makes several announcements at F8 that are relevant to publishers: the Live video API will be open for publishers who want to experiment/innovate; Instant Articles is open to all publishers; publishers will be able to use messenger bots to distribute stories.
April 21: Facebook tweaks the algorithm to focus on articles people are likely to spend time viewing.
April 28: Twitter moves to the News category in the Apple app store.
May 9: Gizmodo reveals details that Facebook’s Trending Topics is actively curated by people who “suppressed” conservative news.
May 12: Facebook releases a 28-page internal document outlining guidelines for staff curating Trending Topics, in response to media reporting suggesting potential bias.
May 19: Instagram adds video to carousel ads.
May 23: Facebook’s general counsel responds to Congress Republicans concerned about bias with a letter; the previous week, Facebook’s legal team met with Chairman of the US Senate Commerce Committee John Thune.
May 24: Instagram adds media buying as fourth advertising partner category.
May 24: Facebook says it will revise the way it curates its Trending topics section, including no longer using external websites to validate a story’s importance.
May 24: Twitter announces changes to simplify Tweets including what counts toward your 140 characters, @names in replies and media attachments (like photos, GIFs, videos, and polls) will no longer “use up” valuable characters.
May 26: Facebook allows for their Audience Network to be used for ads to be seen off-Facebook, a move seen as competitive with Google.
June 2: Facebook Notify is shut down.
June 2: Google AMP launches in France, Germany, Italy, UK, Russia, and Mexico.
June 7: Google announces preliminary results from AMP showing that 80 percent of publishers are seeing higher viewability and 90 percent are seeing higher engagement.
Between June 6 and 12: Intel becomes the first brand to publish content directly to Instant Articles.
June 9: Facebook launches 360 photo. Users can move their phones for a spherical view within a photo.
June 16: Snapchat announces an online magazine called Real Life.
June 21: Twitter Engage launches, allowing for better insights and data. Also, the length of user video is increased from 30 to 140 seconds.
June 22: The Wall Street Journal reports that Facebook has made deals worth more than $50 million with 140 video creators, including publishers, to use Live, since those partnerships were first announced in March.
June 29: Facebook’s algorithm changes to place further emphasis on family and friends and on creating a feed that will “inform” and “entertain.”
July 6: Snapchat introduces Memories.
July 14: Facebook Instant Articles can be posted to Messenger.
July 19: Google announces AMP for ads, to bring ads to the same load time as AMP articles.
July 11—12: Twitter announces multiple live video deals, including with CBS, Wimbledon, and Bloomberg.
August 2: Instagram Stories launches. A compilation of updates a user’s friends see; a Snapchat Stories clone.
August 4: Facebook tweaks the News Feed to reduce clickbait.
August 9: Facebook blocks ad blockers.
August 11: Facebook’s News Feed is modified to place emphasis on “personally informative” items.
August 26: Facebook Trending becomes fully algorithmically driven.
August 27: Apple changes its Spotlight feature so that articles open in-app, hurting publishers.
September 7: Snapchat axes Local Stories.
September 8: Google releases a study of more than 10,000 mobile domains showing that speed matters for engagement and revenue.
September 12: Twitter announces a live streaming partnership with Cheddar.
September 15: Publishers can sell subscriptions within the Apple News app; Apple keeps 30 percent of subscriptions made through the app, and 15 percent of renewals.
September 15: Improvements are made to call to action button on Instagram ads to make them more visible; with video, though, the destination URL opens first within Instagram with the video continuing to play at the top.
September 20: All Google search results, not just the carousel, now show AMP pages.
September 23: Snapchat announces Spectacles and becomes Snap, Inc.
September 29: Twitter opens Moments to everyone.
September 30: Updates to Google AMP so it better supports a variety of ad sizes.
October 12: Facebook also allows for additional ad formats for publishers in Instant Articles.
October 17: Signal, for newsgathering on Facebook, will include a Live Video column.
October 18: Snapchat switches from a revenue sharing arrangement with publishers on Discover to an up-front licensing arrangement.
October 20: Facebook allows 360 photo and video within Instant Articles.
October 28: Facebook rolls out a voting planner for users where they can view and save the initiatives and candidates they will select.
November 10: Instagram introduces ability to add “see more” links to Instagram Stories.
November 11: After controversy, Facebook will curb ethnic affinity marketing by advertisers focused on, for example, credit or housing, who target users based on whether Facebook has determined they are likely Latino or Asian American, for example.
November 11: Facebook buys CrowdTangle, which is used by publishers for analytics.
November 11: Vertical ads are allowed on Instagram.
November 16: Facebook will work with more third parties to ensure the integrity of their metrics after they miscounted publisher performance.
November 19: In response to post-election pressure, Mark Zuckerberg addresses Facebook’s role in fake news.
November 21: Instagram Stories introduces Live Stories for live video streaming.
November 22: To be allowed into China, Facebook built a censorship tool into its platform.
December 5: Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, and YouTube partner to address terrorism content online.
December 5: In an effort to combat misinformation, Facebook prompts users to report “misleading language.”
December 5: Google updates its search bar so that there is no longer an autocomplete that reads “are Jews evil.”
December 12: Facebook launches Live 360 video. Users can have a spherical view of live video.
December 14: Facebook begins talks with video producers and TV studios for original content.
December 20: Facebook launches Live Audio. Allows for formats like news radio.
December 22: Business Insider reports that Twitter inadvertently inflated video ad metrics.

2017

January 9: Recode reports that Facebook will allow mid-roll video ads, with 55 percent of revenue going to publishers.
January 11: Facebook announces the Facebook Journalism Project, to work with publishers on product rollouts, storytelling formats, promotion of local news, subscription models, training journalists, and, on the fake news front, collaborating with the News Literacy Project and fact checking organizations. On the same day, TechCrunch reports Facebook agrees to censor content in Thailand at government’s request.
January 11: Instagram Stories will now have ads, and insights are increased, as the platform hits 150 million users.
January 12: Snapchat releases a universal search bar.
January 17: News that Facebook will end Live video deals with publishers in favor of longer more premium video.
January 19: Snapchat will allow ad targeting using third-party data.
January 23: Snapchat updates publisher guidelines: content must be fact checked and cannot be risqué, and will offer some an “age gate” and will require graphic content warnings.
January 24: Instagram makes Live Stories available globally.
January 25: News that Facebook begins testing Stories, like those on Instagram and Snapchat, at the top of the mobile app in Ireland. Facebook also updates Trending to show publisher names, identify trends by number of publishers and not engagement on a single post, and show everyone in a region the same content. In Thailand and Australia, Facebook will have ads like the ones that are in News Feed inside of Messenger.
January 25: Recode reports that more than 200 publishers have been banned from Google’s AdSense network in an effort to combat fake news.
January 26: Facebook’s News Feed algorithm will reward publishers/videos that keep people watching and mid-roll ads won’t play until 90 seconds.
January 26: Twitter’s Explore tab will allow users to see trends, Moments, Live, and search.
January 30: Twitter’s VP of engineering announces an effort to combat harassment.
January 30: Snapchat announces IPO.
January 31: Facebook updates the algorithm to prioritize “authentic” content and will surface posts around real-time/breaking news. Facebook also announces new and expanded partnerships with Nielsen, ComScore, DoubleVerify (for a total of 24 third-party entities) to give better insights into performance of ads.
February 1: Instagram introduces Albums feature in limited release. Widespread release later in the month.
February 2: Snapchat IPO documents show that media partners were paid $58 million, and that Snap-sold ad revenue was 91 percent.
February 6: Google allows for AMP articles URL to indicate the publisher’s name and not just Google.
February 6: News surfaces that a Syrian refugee identified as a terrorist pursues legal action against Facebook on grounds of “fake news.”
February 7: Twitter continues efforts to combat harassment and improve quality, by “stopping the creation of new abusive accounts, bringing forward safer search results, and collapsing potentially abusive or low-quality Tweets.”
February 8: News surfaces that French publishers complain of effort required for anti-fake news partnership with Facebook.
February 10: Facebook further pushes for transparency around ads and says it will allow for a third-party audit.
February 13: The Washington Post joins Snapchat Discover as Discover shifts to allow for breaking news.
February 13: TechCrunch reports that Twitter will reduce its support for ad products that are not drawing advertisers.
February 14: Facebook announces an app for Apple TV and Amazon Fire that will allow people to watch Facebook videos on their TVs.
February 14: Autoplay videos on Facebook will play with sound.
February 14: Google pulls two anti-Semitic sites off its ad platform.
February 16: Mark Zuckerberg writes a nearly 6,000 word manifesto, “Building Global Community,” on the future of Facebook and global civil society.
February 17: Facebook invites media companies to its offices to talk about products to come throughout the year.
February 20: Facebook allows users to send photos and videos from the in-app camera.
February 20: WhatsApp launches Snapchat clone, Status.
February 23: Mid-roll video ads begin on Facebook, following an announcement in January.

#journalisme
#médias_sociaux

Why There Are No New Social Networks – The Ringer
▻https://theringer.com/social-media-invention-facebook-twitter-snapchat-tech-e40178df183

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/focal/1200/632/51/43/1*0UeWjnhDVh2fWcsDCOAqJg.jpeg

“Social apps are now focused on messaging, and certainly it’s a vibrant area of innovation and advancement,” Blau told me. “So I wouldn’t say that all social apps are stagnating.” Maybe the copycat cycle will just push us away from public-facing social apps altogether and into private messaging, an arguably more inventive (and in some cases, nicer) space. It seems that the only time someone is able to create a new social network, it’s by accident. Venmo is not a social app — at least, it wasn’t intended to be. The PayPal-owned payment system was launched as a dead simple way to share money, complete with a few lighthearted features like emoji and a real-time feed of users’ transactions. This feed ultimately became a sort of social network within the app: It fuels FOMO, forces us to consider the financial side of dating, and even acts as a window into modern drug culture.

Venmo didn’t set out to be a better Twitter or a Facebook alternative; it took a fact of daily life that wasn’t all that interesting and certainly not very “social,” and created new digital communication behaviors. It was accidentally inventive.

Product Hunt’s social editor and writer, Niv Dror, says there’s something else keeping this market stagnant. “Once an app becomes significant enough to pose a threat to the big players, they either get acquired or significantly handicapped by a competitive feature or restricted access,” he told me via email. He cites Meerkat, a huge 2015 hit I’d nearly forgotten about, which was one of the originating apps in the now-ubiquitous livestreaming trend. Dror worked at Meerkat until the app was forced to shutter. “On my second day working at Meerkat, Twitter decided to cut off our access to the social graph (since they acquired Periscope), which really hurt us in the long run.”

#médias_sociaux

Comment la photo d’une manifestante contre un groupe d’extrême droite anglais est devenue virale
▻http://www.lemonde.fr/big-browser/article/2017/04/11/comment-la-photo-d-une-manifestante-contre-un-groupe-d-extreme-droite-anglai

http://s1.lemde.fr/image/2017/04/11/644x322/5109504_3_d34e_photo-prise-samedi-7-avril-par-le-photographe_936202383881098b01aafc405a542a64.jpg

Tête haute, regard direct et léger sourire de défi, Saffiyah Khan fait face à un manifestant d’un groupuscule d’extrême droite anglais, l’English Defence League (EDL), lors d’une manifestation dans la ville de Birmingham, en Angleterre. Cette jeune fille, jusqu’alors anonyme, est devenue en l’espace de quelques jours une véritable icône de résistance pacifique sur les réseaux sociaux. La photographie, prise le samedi 7 avril, a été relayée par de nombreux médias britanniques comme The Guardian, The Telegraph, The Mirror ou encore la BBC.

#résistance #viralité #médias_sociaux

Les trolls de la droite alternative américaine n’ont pas de pouvoirs magiques
▻http://www.internetactu.net/a-lire-ailleurs/les-trolls-de-la-droite-alternative-americaine-nont-pas-de-pouvoirs-ma

Affirmer que les trolls de la droite alternative américaine sur le net ont été un facteur déterminant de la victoire de Trump minimise les tendances qui ont amplifié leur influence, soulignent Jessica Beyer (@jibeyer), Gabriella Coleman @biellacoleman) et Whitney Philipps (@wphillips49, auteure notamment d’un livre sur les rapports entre la (...)

#A_lire_ailleurs #Débats #Recherches #analyse_des_réseaux #médias_sociaux #politique