“We need more reach.”
“This will get a lot of clicks.”
“The client won’t be happy with these numbers.”
We’ve heard these narratives nonstop since our media careers began more than 15 years ago. They are thought patterns that have been normalized in newsrooms and ad agencies across the world.
And this is just the beginning of the issues with the current state of media.
The truth is this: Web2 media is broken.
The traditional models and ways of doing things in media just don’t work anymore. This behavior did not come out of the blue. So how did we get here?
With the rise of social media, the traffic floodgates opened to media websites. Media companies saw an unprecedented explosion of reach due to these platforms and became addicted to this traffic, which helped fuel the rise of programmatic advertising. This is the technology that powers those annoying banner ads on your favorite media websites, from The New York Times to YouTube. The more people visit your website, the more impressions the ad gets, and the more the platform gets paid.
Funny enough, the very platforms that fueled this business model ended up changing their algorithms after seeing how much revenue they were allowing to leave their ecosystem by encouraging users to click away from Facebook or Twitter onto a separate publisher website. So in 2015, Facebook’s notorious algorithm change decimated the traffic sources for hundreds of media companies to keep more of their traffic inside of Facebook. Due to declining revenue, some media properties even went out of business.
We know this because we’ve lived it. As Editor-In-Chief of SPIN, Matt saw firsthand how traffic does not equate to revenue when the publication was forced to undergo layoffs despite exceeding growth goals. As Director of Innovation and Culture at Elite Daily, Alejandro saw how the publication rode Facebook traffic to a sale to Daily Mail only for traffic to significantly decline after the algorithm change.
As media companies prioritized audience scale over quality and optimized for algorithmic platforms like Facebook and Google, there were a number of alarming developments.
First, media platforms found themselves locked in a clickbait race to the bottom. As algorithms rewarded sensationalist headlines and quick trigger fingers, the quality of coverage declined. The race to be first to a story also produced public embarrassments for major media brands who had to retract factually inaccurate reporting. As credibility eroded, public trust in media reached an all-time low.
Second, people became the product. Programmatic advertising reduced us to eyeballs to be monetized and discarded. In the eyes of publishers, there was no distinction made between the quality and the quantity of an audience. Put simply, we were all diminished to a single metric: traffic. By virtue of working at social media companies, the brightest minds in Silicon Valley ended up building an advertising optimization machine, the likes of which had never been seen before. As a result, publishers began prioritizing their advertisers over their audiences.
Third, as publishers and platforms optimized for advertising revenue, they began to attack our privacy. Platforms began to track users across the web without their explicit consent in order to sell more ads – though technically, users consented by accepting the all-too vague and legally verbose “terms and conditions.”
The rise of tracking users using pixels and cookies invited privacy violations across the web. Platforms could now track users’ every move, click, and keystroke, even beyond their own website, to serve them “better” ads.
Technology has always pushed storytelling forward. The Gutenberg printing press catalyzed the information revolution. The invention of the internet forced print publications to become digital. The rise of the smartphone moved digital media to embrace mobile. Web3 technology is of the same caliber. And with it, we have the chance to build something better.
Centered on an ecosystem of technology products that are decentralized, trustless, permissionless, and interoperable, Web3 technologies have the power to create fairer models that benefit everyone. They return ownership to users, bypass the gatekeepers that control traditional media and social platforms, and allow creators and their communities to share in the value they create.
But significantly, this tokenized revolution will not only change how stories are created and consumed, it also has the power to fundamentally redefine relationships that have been cemented for centuries. This technology can actually help us foster the deeper and more meaningful human relationships we want. This comes down to the difference between audience and community.
Your audience is aware that you exist. They may recognize your brand and see you in their social feeds. They may even attend your events or buy your products. But ultimately, there’s a limit to their participation, and they are largely on the receiving end of the content you produce. As coverage became more homogenous to exploit algorithms, media brands became interchangeable, such that readers have little incentive to choose one over another. In web2, consumers became loyal to the headline, not the brand.
In contrast, community wants to win together. And in web3, more often than not, they actually have a literal stake in doing so. By aligning incentives and rewarding participation by decentralizing ownership and governance, communities are the prime drivers of value creation.
In web3, digital ownership is front and center. For the first time since the origins of the internet, the blockchain allows for root ownership. Now media companies and creators can build community in a digital asset economy as an end in itself and monetize directly by sharing in the value that they create.
We envision a future where digital publishers liberate themselves from the mindless tyranny of clicks, pageviews, and CPMs. Users will no longer be the product being sold in antiquated and exploitative systems; they will be active partners and owners in the content and experiences being created.
Because of these experiences, we wanted to do things differently from day one. If you visit nftnow.com, you’ll notice there are no banner ads. We refused to implement programmatic advertising because of the misaligned incentives it creates to prioritize advertisers over users, sensationalize coverage, and violate users’ privacy. We believe that media companies shouldn’t serve you ads; they should serve you opportunities.
We also refused to include any pixels and cookies to track our users. Principles like consent matter more to us. We believe privacy is a fundamental human right and should be respected across the internet.
The Now Network is our next step in pioneering a community-centric media model and building a creator-friendly future. The Now Pass is the key that unlocks that door. You can learn more about the details and mechanics at nowpass.xyz.
Here’s how the Now Network will begin to share the value being created with our membership community.
From early access to information and insights to curated private chats where you can connect with experts and other builders in your industry, the Now Network will offer you the tools you need to succeed alongside insider access to web3’s leading minds.
Now Pass holders will also be eligible for exclusive access to our acclaimed IRL and virtual events, including our tentpole events The Gateway, NFT100, and nft now presents, alongside our satellite events around Art Basel Miami, NFT NYC, Frieze LA, ETH Denver, Faena Rose Miami, Jackson Hole, and many more.
We believe media should be more than a one-way street. With the Now Pass, community members will be incentivized to engage with content and provide feedback through our reward mechanisms. By realigning incentives and reimagining how a publisher can create and share value in a web3 context, we will encourage deeper, more authentic connections and a greater sense of loyalty.
We want our community to become co-creators in the stories being told. The Now Network is our first step towards progressive decentralization. We believe this will create a more inclusive and transparent ecosystem to incubate ideas and uplift new voices. We’ll be transitioning some of our most popular content series (ex., Next Up) to a community-curated Token Curated Registries (TCR) model with on-chain voting that empowers our community members to have a say in who and what gets covered.
The Now Network will be built over time, not overnight. We are being intentional and taking our time to create something sustainable. This is a first step — a foundation for all of our initiatives in building the future of tokenized media. We may not always get everything right – and that’s okay. Experimentation is a critical part of pioneering a new paradigm. But our commitment to this space is long-term, so we will build in public over the coming months, years, and decades. We invite you to join us in learning, growing, and co-creating this future together.
You’re more than a pageview. It’s time to change the relationship between publishers and their communities.
Sincerely,
Matt Medved & Alejandro Navia
Co-Founders of nft now
|
|
VICTORIA — Premier David Eby has pushed the pause button on a contentious bill that would have allowed the province to recover health care and other costs attributed to the marketing of risky products in B.C.
Two dozen business and industry groups had called for the New Democrats to put the bill on hold, claiming it was so broadly drafted that it could be used to go after producers, distributors and retailers of every kind.
“It is safe to say that we got the attention of these major multinational companies,” the premier told reporters on Tuesday, citing the deal with Meta, Snapchat, TikTok and X, the major players in the field.
“They understand our concern and the urgency with which we’re approaching this issue. They also understand the bill is still there.”
The New Democrats maintain that the legislation was never intended to capture the many B.C. companies and associations that complained about it.
Rather it was targeted at Facebook owner Meta and other social media companies and the online harm done to young people. A prime example was the suicide of a Prince George youth who was trapped by an online predator.
Still, there was nothing in the wording of Bill 12, the Public Health Accountability and Cost Recovery Act, to indicate its application would be confined to social media companies or their impact on young people.
Some critics wondered if the bill’s broad-based concept of harms and risks could be used to prosecute the liquor board or the dispensers of safer-supply drugs, products with proven harms greater than any sugary drink.
Perhaps thinking along those lines, the government specifically exempted itself from prosecution under the Act.
This week’s announcement came as a surprise. As recently as Monday, Attorney General Niki Sharma told reporters the government had no intention of putting the bill on hold.
Tuesday, she justified her evasion by saying the talks with the social media companies were intense and confidential.
She said the pause was conditional on Meta and the other companies delivering a quick response to government concerns.
“British Columbians expect us to take action on online safety,” she told reporters. “What I’ll be looking for at this table is quick and immediate action to get to that better, safety online.”
A prime goal is addressing online harassment and “the online mental health and anxiety that’s rising in young people,” she said
“I want to sit down with these companies look at them face to face and see what they can do immediately to improve the outcomes for British Columbians.”
Meta has already committed to rectifying Eby’s concern that it should relay urgent news about wildfires, flood and other disasters in B.C. Last year, those were blocked, collateral damage in the company’s hardball dispute with the federal government over linking to news stories from Canadian media companies.
Eby says he was very skeptical about the initial contact from the companies. Now he sees Meta’s willingness to deliver emergency information as a “major step” and he’s prepared to give talks the benefit of the doubt.
Not long ago he was scoring political points off the social media companies in the harshest terms.
“The billionaires who run them resist accountability, resist any suggestion that they have responsibility for the harms that they are causing,” said the premier on March 14, the day Bill 12 was introduced.
Given those characterizations, perhaps the big, faceless billionaires will simply direct their negotiating team to play for time until the legislation adjourns as scheduled on May 16.
“The legislation is not being pulled and we’re not backtracking,” said Sharma. “We can always come back and bring legislation back.”
The government could schedule a quick makeup session of the legislature in late May or June or even in early September, before the house is dissolved for the four-week campaign leading up to the scheduled election day, Oct. 19.
More likely, if the New Democrats feel doublecrossed, they could go back to war with the faceless billionaires with a view to re-enacting Bill 12 after a hoped-for election victory.
Even if the New Democrats get some satisfaction from the social media companies in the short term, they have also framed Bill 12 as a way to force the marketers of risky products to help cover the cost of health care and other services.
B.C.’s attorney general says the province can bring the online harms legislation back but it will first seek remedies through negotiations with social media companies.Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
The British Columbia government has agreed to shelve proposed legislation that would have allowed it to sue social-media companies for online harms after Meta, TikTok and others agreed to work with the province to put voluntary protections in place.
The social-media companies have not agreed to anything other than talks, but Attorney-General Niki Sharma credited the proposed legislation with bringing the key players to the province’s door.
“Our bill was able to get the attention of some pretty big companies out there and get them to the table with us, and I’m pleased with that,” she told reporters Tuesday.
The government can bring the bill back, she said, but it will first seek remedies through negotiations. “We could be locked in litigation for years, but at this stage it’s my obligation to see if we can come to some kind of improvements,” Ms. Sharma said.
Premier David Eby said the agreement was hammered out after Meta reached out to the province. A spokesperson for the company could not immediately be reached for comment.
Danielle Morgan, a spokesperson for TikTok, said her company is committed to developing new safeguards. “We look forward to joining Premier Eby and working with industry counterparts … to discuss best practices towards our shared goal of keeping young people safe online.”
The province introduced Bill 12, the Public Health Accountability and Cost Recovery Act, in March with the promise that it would allow government to recover costs associated with the promotion, marketing and distribution of products that are harmful to adults and children in the province.
But while the bill received the support of researchers who study the impact of some platforms on mental well-being, particularly in teenagers, the broad scope of the legislation alarmed business leaders who warned it could be used to target companies well beyond social-media platforms.
“The net spread so widely, it could capture just about anything you could imagine,” said Bridgitte Anderson, president and chief executive officer of the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade. She said the provincial government heard the concerns of many different sectors when it withdrew the bill from this spring’s legislative agenda. “We’re delighted the government is going to hit pause on this.”
The B.C. bill was tabled just weeks after Ottawa introduced Bill C-63 to create a new Online Harms Act, which is meant to hold tech platforms accountable for the content they host.
Kaitlynn Mendes, a professor of sociology at Ontario’s Western University, is an expert on the impact of online harms on youth, including sexual exploitation, self-harm, anxiety and anti-social behaviour.
She said the B.C. government is being optimistic in thinking it can bring social-media giants into line without a legal cudgel.
“I think that is wishful thinking. Industries don’t want to be governed. They’d rather have codes of conduct but that relies on them being good faith actors – ultimately, they are going to act in their best interests. I’d be skeptical that it’s going to change anything,” she said in an interview.
“I really hope the Canadian government doesn’t try to rely on deals. We need to have structures in place to hold these companies accountable.”
Mr. Eby issued a joint statement on Tuesday with representatives from Meta, TikTok, Snap and X, saying they have reached an agreement to work to help young people stay safe online through the new BC Online Safety Action Table.
“Digital platforms are powerful tools, which can connect family members and loved ones and are places where we find like-minded people. Places where community is built and sustained. But the internet is also a place where criminals and scammers are constantly seeking new ways to find and extort potential victims,” the joint statement said.
Mr. Eby championed the pursuit of tackling social-media harms after meeting with the grieving parents of Carson Cleland, a 12-year-old who killed himself last October after being sexually victimized online.
“Carson was deceived by an online predator, tormented and sexually extorted. He took his own life before his parents were aware of what was happening,” the statement continued. “Premier Eby made a promise to Carson’s parents that his government would find ways to make sure Carson left behind a legacy that will help protect other young people.”
The province will place Bill 12 on hold while the parties meet to discuss how to protect youth from online harms before they happen.
Ms. Sharma said there are three areas B.C. wants addressed: sexual exploitation of youth online; rising mental-health issues and anxiety among young people; and online harassment and bullying.
B.C.’s bill was modelled on its efforts to seek damages from major tobacco companies over tobacco-related health costs. The province was the first Canadian jurisdiction to launch such a lawsuit, in 1998, but that case is not yet resolved – underscoring the lengthy process involved in reaching a resolution.
Welcome to Best of Late Night, a rundown of the previous night’s highlights that lets you sleep — and lets us get paid to watch comedy. Here are the 50 best movies on Netflix right now.
Opening arguments began in former President Donald Trump’s criminal trial on Monday, with much of the news media coverage homing in on as many details as possible about the proceedings.
Jon Stewart called the trial a “test of the fairness of the American legal system, but it’s also a test of the media’s ability to cover Donald Trump in a responsible way.”
Jimmy Kimmel’s sidekick, Guillermo Rodriguez, took the stage with Madonna in Mexico City over the weekend.
The economist Stephanie Kelton will chat with Jordan Klepper and Ronny Chieng, the guest co-hosts, on Tuesday’s “Daily Show.”
In “Under the Bridge,” Hulu’s chilling new series, Riley Keough and Lily Gladstone investigate the murder of a teenager.
Remnants of bird flu virus found in pasteurized milk, FDA says
Mayor's youth advisory council seeks submissions for art gala – SooToday
Some Canadians will be digging out of 25+ cm of snow by Friday – The Weather Network
"Hi, It's Me": NASA's Voyager 1 Phones Home From 15 Billion Miles Away – NDTV
Jon Stewart Slams the Media for Coverage of Trump Trial – The New York Times
Made Right Here: Woodworking art – CTV News Kitchener
Bird flu virus found in grocery milk as officials say supply still safe
Taxes should not wag the tail of the investment dog, but that’s what Trudeau wants
