admin

So, Facebook (or Meta, as it’s officially known now) is ditching the news game in Australia. Surprise, surprise. After all those years of cozying up to the media, promising to support high-quality journalism, they’ve decided it’s just not worth it. If you remember the fable of the scorpion and the frog, it’s pretty much the same story. The scorpion, true to its nature, stings the frog midway through their journey. For Facebook, that sting was pulling the plug on paying for news under Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code.

The Addiction Problem

Facebook’s grip on users is like a bad habit. It’s engineered to be addictive—think smoking but for your brain. Whistleblower Frances Haugen spilled the beans that Facebook knew its products were harmful but chose profit over user safety. That’s just the beginning. Facebook has let hate speech, misinformation, and even data exploitation run wild. Remember Cambridge Analytica? Or the campaign against journalist Maria Ressa? It’s clear: Facebook’s priorities are more about profit and less about doing right by its users or journalists.

A Missed Opportunity?

Facebook didn’t pay up when the opportunity arose to support journalism in Australia. It was a chance to counter misinformation and back quality reporting. But no, they opted out, which, ironically, might have been a blessing in disguise. The Albanese government could force Facebook to pay for news under the News Media Bargaining Code, but if they did, Facebook might just pack up and leave. Either way, we’d be better off. As Peter Greste put it, Meta’s goals and democracy’s needs don’t really line up.

What Can We Do?

Here’s the deal: don’t let Facebook get a free pass. Encourage folks to ditch the Facebook news feed and sign up for reputable news sources. The Conversation’s daily newsletter is a great start and totally free. We’ve also got some cool weekly newsletters, like Science Wrap and Books & Ideas, if you’re into that. Bookmark our homepage if you’re reading us at home or work.

In Australia, at least, we don’t have to let the scorpion keep stinging.

As AI tools increasingly become part of the news production process, the question of whether media organizations should disclose their use of AI is gaining prominence. Here’s a breakdown of the key arguments for and against disclosure, and how it might affect journalism.

Arguments for Disclosure

1. Transparency and Accountability: Disclosing AI use can help ensure transparency. When consumers know that AI was involved in creating or aiding a news story, they can make more informed judgments about the content. Transparency can also build trust, as it shows a commitment to honesty about the production process.
2. Mitigating Bias: AI systems can reflect the biases present in their training data. By making it clear when AI has been used, consumers can be more aware of potential biases in the content and critically evaluate the information. This is crucial for maintaining journalistic integrity.
3. Protecting Against Misinformation: AI has the potential to generate convincing but false information. Disclosure can help consumers recognize AI-generated content and be more vigilant about verifying the information before accepting or sharing it.

Arguments Against Disclosure

1. Stifling Innovation: Mandatory disclosure might hinder news organizations from experimenting with AI. The fear of public backlash or misunderstanding could discourage the adoption of innovative tools that could enhance reporting and fact-checking.
2. Potential Confusion: Not all consumers understand how AI works, and frequent disclosures might confuse or overwhelm them. This could lead to unnecessary skepticism or fear about AI tools, even when they are used responsibly and ethically.

Potential Scenarios

1. Real-Time Fact-Checking: Imagine a news outlet using AI for real-time fact-checking during live events. If required to disclose this every time, the outlet might hesitate to use such tools, potentially impacting the accuracy and timeliness of information provided to the audience.
2. Personalized News Curation: AI algorithms that tailor news content to individual preferences could face public distrust if their use is widely disclosed. This might reduce the effectiveness of personalized news services, affecting user engagement and satisfaction.

Current Approaches

Some organizations, like Wired and the BBC, are already disclosing their use of AI. The New York Times has introduced “enhanced bylines” to provide more context about the journalists and the production process of their stories. These steps aim to balance transparency with the practicalities of using AI in journalism.

Moving Forward

To address the complexities of AI in journalism, several steps are recommended:

1. Develop Clear Guidelines: Media organizations should establish and follow clear guidelines on the ethical use of AI, covering issues like bias, transparency, and accountability.
2. Invest in Training: Journalists should be trained to understand and responsibly use AI tools. This will help ensure that AI is used effectively without compromising journalistic standards.
3. Collaborate with Experts: News organizations should work with policy makers, technology companies, and academic institutions to develop ethical standards and address emerging issues related to AI in journalism.

Conclusion

The use of AI in journalism brings both opportunities and challenges. While there are compelling reasons to consider disclosure, it’s crucial to balance transparency with practical considerations and innovation. A thoughtful approach to AI can help maintain trust in journalism and ensure that technology serves the public interest.

Journalism is at a crossroads as generative AI tools become more integrated into newsrooms. From drafting articles to crafting headlines, these tools are seen as a way to boost productivity and cut costs. But they also raise significant ethical and practical questions. Here’s a look at the current state of AI in journalism and the concerns it brings.

The AI Adoption Curve

A recent Associated Press survey revealed that nearly 70% of journalists have used generative AI tools for tasks like drafting articles, creating headlines, or managing social media. However, a global survey by Cision found a lower adoption rate of 47%. Despite these variations, the trend is clear: AI is becoming a part of the journalistic toolkit.

The Challenges of AI in Journalism

1. Reliability Issues: AI tools, despite their advancements, are not foolproof. They can produce incorrect or misleading information, as seen with Google’s Bard giving incorrect details about space discoveries. This means that journalists must still fact-check AI-generated content, which can negate any time savings.
2. Shifting Roles: AI can transform journalists from writers into editors. While AI can draft content, the process of writing – struggling with ideas, refining arguments, and developing a narrative – is integral to journalism. AI’s focus on generating text might overshadow the creative and critical process involved in journalism.
3. Impact on Writing: Generative AI emphasizes efficiency over the creative struggle involved in writing. This shift might undermine the nuanced and iterative process of developing ideas into coherent articles. Writing is not just about producing words but about evolving ideas through the writing process.

Ethical and Relational Concerns

1. Integrity of Journalism: The use of AI raises questions about the integrity of journalism. If readers value a journalist’s unique voice and perspective, does AI’s involvement diminish that relationship? Trust in journalism is closely tied to the human element – the writer’s insight, experience, and authenticity.
2. Reader Trust: The idea of consuming content generated by an AI might affect how readers perceive and trust that content. If readers discover that a significant portion of an article was created by AI, it could impact their appreciation and trust in the work.
3. AI’s Lack of Empathy: AI lacks the human qualities that underpin journalistic values like speaking truth to power and sustaining democratic institutions. This disconnect might be troubling for readers who see journalism as a noble profession with a social mission.

The Path Forward

While AI tools offer efficiency and new capabilities, their integration into journalism must be handled carefully. Balancing the advantages of AI with the ethical and practical concerns is crucial. Ensuring that AI complements rather than replaces the human elements of journalism will be key to maintaining the field’s integrity and public trust.

In summary, while generative AI presents exciting possibilities for journalism, it also poses significant challenges. The ongoing experimentation with these tools highlights the need for a thoughtful approach to integrating AI into journalistic practices.

Remember when everyone predicted that print media, especially magazines, would vanish with the rise of digital? Turns out, magazines are still around, and some are even thriving. So, what’s keeping print magazines alive in a world dominated by screens?

The Digital Disruption

It’s true that the digital age has hit magazines hard. With the internet offering instant, often free access to information, print magazines have had to contend with a significant drop in readership and advertising revenue. People expect news and content on a daily, even hourly basis, and they’re less inclined to wait for a magazine to show up in the mail.

Online media and social platforms have taken over, offering a constant stream of short-form content that competes directly with magazines. Plus, advertising dollars have flowed into digital spaces, leading to a sharp decline in magazine ad revenue.

The Resilience of Print

Despite all this, print magazines haven’t disappeared. Far from it. Big names like Vogue and The New Yorker continue to attract readers in both print and digital formats. Even more surprisingly, new print magazines are still popping up. In the U.S. alone, 122 new print magazines launched in 2021.

In Australia, magazine sales actually rose by 4.1% in 2023, and some old favorites, like Girlfriend, have made nostalgic returns.

Why Print Magazines Still Matter

So why do print magazines still hold a place in our hearts?

1. Physical Experience: Many people enjoy the tactile pleasure of flipping through pages. Reading on paper feels different from staring at a screen, often leading to a more immersive and less distractible experience.
2. Digital Fatigue: After years of screen overload, some readers are seeking a break from digital media. Print magazines offer a refreshing analog alternative.
3. Aesthetic Appeal: Magazines often excel in design and photography, creating a visually engaging experience that digital formats can struggle to match.
4. Niche Markets: New print magazines are often aimed at specific audiences with a high level of quality and unique content. Advances in printing technology have made small, high-quality print runs more feasible and cost-effective.
5. Luxury Appeal: Many new magazines position themselves as luxury items. With higher cover prices and less frequent publication schedules, they cater to readers looking for a special experience rather than constant updates.
6. Effective Advertising: Print ads are still highly regarded. Studies show readers are more likely to engage with print advertisements compared to digital ones, which can often be ignored.

The Future of Magazines

Magazines may not be as dominant as they once were, but they’ve found a sustainable niche. They might not compete with the speed of digital content, but they offer something that digital media often can’t—quality, design, and a meaningful reading experience.

In a world where everything seems to be moving online, print magazines prove that there’s still room for physical media in our media landscape. They adapt and evolve, finding new ways to stay relevant and valued.

Social media has become a huge part of our lives, with platforms like Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok boasting user counts in the billions. But before you get too excited about these massive numbers, let’s break down what they actually mean.

What’s an ‘Active User’ Anyway?

So, you hear about Facebook having over 3 billion users or TikTok claiming 1.5 billion. Sounds impressive, right? But here’s the thing: these numbers can be a bit misleading.

An “active user” is usually someone who’s logged in and used the platform in a specific timeframe—say, the last month. But just because someone’s counted as “active” doesn’t mean they’re actually engaging with the platform in a meaningful way.

Plus, not all users are unique. Many of us juggle multiple accounts and platforms. In Australia, people manage nearly seven social media accounts on average. This means those user numbers can be a bit inflated.

The Reality Behind the Numbers

Here’s where things get a bit tricky. Platforms count things like bot accounts or inactive profiles as part of their numbers. This can pump up the stats and give a skewed picture of actual engagement.

Also, what counts as an “active user” can vary from platform to platform. One site’s idea of an active user might not be the same as another’s, which makes comparing them a bit of a guessing game.

Does a Big User Count Matter?

TikTok might have a jaw-dropping 1.5 billion users, but that doesn’t tell the whole story. While the numbers make TikTok look huge, they don’t capture how impactful the platform really is. For instance, the content you see on TikTok is heavily influenced by its algorithm, which can make it seem like you’re engaging more than you actually are.

Different Platforms, Different Crowds

Different age groups flock to different platforms. Gen Z loves TikTok, while Facebook is popular with older generations like millennials and boomers. Snapchat and Instagram are favorites for those in their late teens to early 30s.

Each platform caters to different needs—TikTok for entertainment, LinkedIn for professional networking, and Facebook for staying in touch with family and friends.

Why the Numbers Don’t Always Matter

For most people, it’s less about which platform has the most users and more about where their friends and family are hanging out. If your social circle is on Instagram, you’re probably spending more time there, regardless of how many people use it globally.

In the end, it’s about the quality of connections you make and the interactions you have. So next time you hear about social media user numbers, remember: it’s not just about the big numbers but how these platforms fit into our daily lives and communities.

The Shift to Digital News Consumption

In recent years, the way Australians consume news has shifted dramatically. Our research highlights a significant trend: Australians born overseas are more inclined to turn to social media and online sources for their news, compared to those born in Australia. This shift reflects broader global patterns and raises important questions about the future of news media in a multicultural society.

Survey Insights: A Changing News Landscape

Our study surveyed 216 Australians born in Australia and 221 Australians from diverse cultural backgrounds. The results reveal a clear preference among the latter group for online news sources. Australians born overseas were more likely to rely on social media platforms (18% vs. 12%) and online news sites (65% vs. 48%) as their primary sources of news. In contrast, those born in Australia preferred traditional media, with television remaining a major news source (42% vs. 29%).

The Digital Divide: Social Media and News Aggregation

Respondents from overseas backgrounds also showed a higher tendency to use news aggregators like Google News (34% vs. 23%) and to search for news topics via search engines (72% vs. 47%). Social media played a crucial role, with more Australians born overseas discovering news stories through social media contacts (53% vs. 35%). This digital preference highlights a growing reliance on online platforms for timely and diverse news content.

The Impact of Demographic Shifts

The 2016 census showed that over a quarter of Australians were born overseas, with significant increases in migrants from Asia and other regions. This demographic shift is influencing news consumption habits. Our research indicates that Australians born overseas are more interested in international news and often seek it out through Australian online sites (80% vs. 50%) and social media. This trend underscores the need for mainstream media to adapt to the changing landscape.

Challenges for Traditional Media

The rise of digital news consumption poses challenges for traditional media outlets. The industry is grappling with declining revenues and intense competition from global online media and subscription services. While social media provides a platform for diverse news consumption, it often lacks the rigorous journalistic standards of traditional media. This can lead to the spread of unverified information and potential misinformation.

Trust and Quality in News Consumption

Interestingly, our study found that Australians born overseas tend to trust social media slightly more than their locally-born counterparts. However, trust in all media sources is waning, with about 19% of participants expressing distrust in any media. This highlights a broader concern about the quality and reliability of news consumed online.

Implications for the Future

The fragmentation of news consumption, driven by diverse online sources, impacts community cohesion and shared understanding. As news audiences become more segmented, traditional media must adapt by addressing the needs of a multicultural audience and enhancing coverage of international and transnational issues. By doing so, they can regain relevance and provide more comprehensive news coverage.

Conclusion

The preference of Australians born overseas for online and social media news sources reflects broader global trends and demographic changes. As traditional media faces challenges in the digital era, it must innovate to cater to a diverse audience and ensure the delivery of accurate and relevant news. Understanding and addressing these shifts is crucial for maintaining an informed and cohesive society.

Understanding Social Media Manipulation

As we wrap up another year, it’s worth reflecting on how social media can subtly shape our perceptions and behaviors. In 2018, I realized how easily social media could influence us and decided it was time to rethink my online habits. If you’re concerned about the impact of social media on your thinking and well-being, here are four crucial reads that helped me understand the risks and how to manage them.

1. Don’t Trust Social Media Blindly

At the start of 2018, the revelations about Facebook’s role in the 2016 election made me question how much trust I should place in social media platforms. According to Dartmouth College scholars Denise Anthony and Luke Stark, it’s wise to be cautious with social media companies, particularly when it comes to how they handle our personal data. Their advice? Don’t trust them until they prove themselves trustworthy. I took this to heart by scaling back my Facebook usage, deleting some of my personal data, and being more selective about my interactions on the platform. While Facebook can still track my activity, limiting my engagement may reduce their ability to manipulate my experience.

2. Check Your Own Perceptions

To better understand online manipulation, I explored tools developed by Filippo Menczer and his team at Indiana University’s Observatory on Social Media. They created resources like “Fakey,” a game that helps users distinguish between reliable and unreliable news, and “Hoaxy,” which visually tracks how misinformation spreads across social networks. Another tool, “Botometer,” assesses the likelihood that a Twitter account is operated by a bot. Engaging with these tools has been eye-opening, helping me become more aware of biases and misinformation.

3. The Power of Bots

Bots can have a significant impact on public opinion, even if they make up only a small percentage of social media activity. MIT professor Tauhid Zaman’s research demonstrated that a few highly active bots can shift opinions dramatically. The real issue isn’t the number of bots, but how often they post and the influence they wield. Understanding this has highlighted the importance of being critical of the content we encounter and the sources behind it.

4. Engage with Real People

Spending less time on social media has freed up time for face-to-face interactions, which, according to Georgetown psychologist Kostadin Kushlev, are far more beneficial for our mental well-being. Kushlev’s research suggests that digital interactions can actually detract from the psychological benefits of in-person socializing. I’ve found that focusing on the people physically present in my life leads to a more fulfilling and enjoyable social experience than trying to juggle online interactions.

Final Thoughts

Avoiding social media manipulation and enhancing our well-being involves being mindful of how we use these platforms. By critically assessing the information we encounter, limiting our engagement to what feels authentic, and prioritizing real-life connections, we can navigate the digital landscape more effectively. As we move forward, it’s worth remembering that social media should serve us, not the other way around.

The Paradox of Connection and Loneliness

Social media has transformed how we connect with others, making it easier than ever to stay in touch with friends and family. But, despite these advances, loneliness is a growing concern. The big question is: does social media help us feel more connected or more isolated? The answer isn’t straightforward—it largely depends on how we use these platforms.

The Loneliness Epidemic

Loneliness is a serious issue. According to the 2018 Australian Loneliness Report, over a quarter of Australians reported feeling lonely several times a week. Loneliness is linked to a range of health problems, from cardiovascular disease to depression and even early mortality. This growing issue raises an important question: with all the technological tools at our disposal, why are we still feeling so isolated?

Social Media: A Double-Edged Sword

Social media can be a powerful tool for connection, but it’s not a cure-all for loneliness. Research shows that the impact of social media on loneliness is mixed. For some, heavy use of social media is associated with increased loneliness, while others find it a valuable tool for staying connected and reducing feelings of isolation.

The key factor is how social media is used. For those who use it to enhance real-life relationships or forge new, meaningful connections, it can be a valuable tool. However, if social media is used as a substitute for face-to-face interactions, it can actually exacerbate feelings of loneliness.

Quality vs. Quantity of Connections

One reason for these mixed outcomes is the difference between “social loneliness” and “emotional loneliness.” Social loneliness refers to a lack of contact with others, while emotional loneliness is about a lack of deep, meaningful connections. Social media can help with social loneliness by keeping us in touch with others, but it often falls short in addressing emotional loneliness, which requires more profound, supportive relationships.

The Role of Social Media in Modern Life

Social media can be a double-edged sword. On one hand, it offers easy connections with people around the world and can help us stay in touch with friends and family over long distances. Platforms like Facebook and Instagram can help us meet new people and organize social events. Online support groups can also provide valuable connections for those who feel isolated.

On the other hand, heavy social media use is often linked with increased loneliness, particularly because online interactions can feel shallow compared to face-to-face connections. The curated nature of social media, where people often present only the highlights of their lives, can exacerbate feelings of inadequacy and loneliness.

The Impact of Modern Living

The way we live today contributes to our feelings of loneliness. The shift from long-term careers to gig work often means frequent relocations, which can disrupt personal connections. Modern housing designs and suburban sprawl can lead to socially disconnected environments. Single-person households are also on the rise, contributing to feelings of isolation.

Finding Balance

To combat loneliness, it’s important to use social media as a tool to enhance real-life connections rather than replace them. Engaging in meaningful conversations online, participating in local groups, and maintaining face-to-face interactions are all crucial. Social media should work for us, helping to fulfill our need for connection rather than replacing the depth of real-life relationships.

Conclusion

Social media has the potential to both alleviate and exacerbate loneliness, depending on how it’s used. By focusing on enhancing real-life relationships and using social media to support, rather than replace, these connections, we can leverage technology to reduce feelings of isolation. Ultimately, achieving a balance between online and offline interactions may help us live in a world that feels a bit less lonely.

Broadcast Channels Get a Reply Option

Hey Instagram enthusiasts! If you’ve been keeping an eye on Instagram’s latest updates, you might have noticed a fresh feature rolling out that’s changing up how Broadcast Channels work. As of September 2, 2024, Instagram is letting creators enable replies in their Broadcast Channels. Sounds like a cool upgrade, right?

How It Works

So here’s the deal: Until now, Broadcast Channels were all about one-way communication. Creators would send out updates, and followers would get the info. But now, you can have a back-and-forth. When replies are turned on, subscribers can comment directly within the Broadcast Channel. The catch? These replies won’t clutter up the main feed. Instead, you’ll need to tap into a specific message thread to see any responses.

It’s not quite like a group chat, but it’s a way to have topical discussions based on each announcement or post. Think of it as a mini-forum within the channel where fans can engage about particular updates without having to jump to another group or app.

Why This Makes Sense

You might be scratching your head wondering why this is a big deal. Well, Instagram’s been seeing a major shift in how people interact on the platform. More and more engagement is happening in DMs rather than the main feed. With about half of what you see in your feed being AI-recommended content rather than posts from people you follow, Instagram’s trying to keep that personal touch alive. By adding replies to Broadcast Channels, Instagram is bridging the gap between the broadcast-style feed and more interactive, social engagement.

What’s Behind the Change

Instagram’s move seems to be all about keeping you connected. With the main feed becoming more like TikTok’s algorithm-driven stream of content, Instagram wants to make sure you’re still getting those personal, direct interactions. The new replies feature fits into Instagram’s broader strategy of blending TikTok-like content discovery with more meaningful social connections. Plus, they’re not stopping there—expect more tweaks like the recent additions of Notes and Stories comments to keep the conversation flowing.

The Bigger Picture

This new feature is a smart move from Instagram, aiming to enhance user engagement and keep the platform feeling personal. It’s a balancing act between staying on trend with content discovery while ensuring users still have spaces to connect and chat about the things that matter to them.

So, if you’re a fan of Broadcast Channels, get ready for a new layer of interaction. It’s all part of Instagram’s push to stay relevant in a world where social media is constantly evolving.

TikTok’s New Moves for Election Integrity

Hey there, TikTok fans! If you’ve been scrolling through your feed lately, you might have caught wind of some big changes TikTok is making to keep us all in the loop about the upcoming U.S. elections. On September 4, 2024, TikTok dropped some major updates to its U.S. Election Center, and it looks like they’re seriously stepping up their game to fight misinformation and keep us informed.

New Features and Partnerships

So, what’s new? TikTok’s teaming up with Democracy Works to give us more detailed info about voting. They’re rolling out FAQs from trustworthy sources to help clear up any confusion about how elections work. And come November, they’ll be working with The Associated Press to bring you live election results right in the app. Pretty cool, right?

But wait, there’s more! TikTok’s also getting into the media literacy game with MediaWise. They’re launching a new series to help us spot and avoid misinformation. This is a big deal because, let’s face it, we all know how easy it is to get caught up in fake news.

Going Global and Keeping Us Updated

TikTok’s not stopping there. They’re planning to make their election info available in multiple languages, so everyone can get the scoop, no matter what language they speak. And they’re keeping us in the loop about which posts they’re taking down related to election misinformation. Transparency is key!

Big Bucks for Integrity

Now, here’s the kicker: TikTok is dropping a whopping $2 billion on trust and safety this year. That’s a lot of cash! A big chunk of that is going towards making sure they’re on top of election integrity and their U.S. operations. Even though there’s talk of TikTok potentially being banned in the U.S., they’re still pushing forward with these improvements. They’re showing they’re serious about keeping the platform safe and reliable.

The Bigger Picture

It’s a bit of a mixed bag with TikTok right now. On one hand, they’re doing a lot to fight misinformation and keep us informed. On the other hand, there’s still the looming question of whether they’ll be able to stick around in the U.S. or not. But regardless of what happens, it’s clear they’re putting in the effort to make sure we’ve got the right info when it counts.

So, as we head into election season, keep an eye on those updates from TikTok. They’re working hard to make sure we’re all set with the info we need.