Facebook vs. Twitter: News

Twitter is an online social network that enables users to send 140-character messages known as “tweets” to friends and followers. Facebook is a social networking service used to post, share, comment, and like personal and impersonal news and events for friends to see.

With the recent events in Ferguson, which led to protests and civil disorder after the shooting and death of an unarmed black teen, Michael Brown, the question has been raised about where and how people were receiving information and news.

Mathew Ingram, in his article “Twitter vs. Facebook as a news source: Ferguson shows the downsides of an algorithmic filter”, comments that Twitter was breaking news in Ferguson with pictures of the protests and live tweets. On the other hand, at the same time, Facebook was showing information and videos about the Ice Bucket Challenge. It is because Twitter is much more news focused and rapid-fire than Facebook, which targets longer, more detailed updates, it would seem that it is more of an online new source than Facebook – which, for the events of Ferguson, it is.

However, Facebook filters what people see on their news feed, which can greatly impact how people receive and share news. In her article, “What Happens to #Ferguson Affects Ferguson: Net Neutrality, Algorithmic Filtering and Ferguson”, Zeynep Tufekci asserts that the power of algorithms has serious social implications. Through Twitter, Zeynep Tufekci argues, the events of Ferguson became national news that spiraled out of control. Twitter drew attention to the shootings and racism presented, which called for action that escalated through the use of social media.

With Twitter people expect live tweets, documentation, and real-time videos. But when it comes to Facebook people don’t expect someone to live post events (that’s what Twitter is for). Rather, Facebook users expect in-depth news articles to be shared, links to stories and documentation that was filtered and edited after the fact. This allows for people to see more than just a 140-character blurb that could be misinterpreted or lacking crucial details.

However, in terms of strengths, weaknesses, goals, and users, Facebook and Twitter cannot compete with one another. They are two different platforms with different prerogatives and uses.

The E-book Oligopoly

Photo by Amazon

This past week I celebrated a birthday and was gifted with a Kindle Paperwhite. As a new Kindle owner I instantly made an Amazon account and began searching for my favorite books to buy.

Thus, I was shocked to learn that, like many other specialty stores, the e-book marketplace is dominated by a few major chain stores, including: Amazon, Apple, and Barnes & Noble. These businesses create an oligopoly – a market form in which a market or industry is dominated by a small number of sellers. Oligopolies can result from reduced competition which can lead to higher prices for consumers.

Now, these individual companies can also control which e-books are made available to the public because they also own all the major e-reading platforms (Amazon – Kindle, Apple – iBook/iPad, Barnes & Noble – Nook). The most shocking part: these companies make decisions, not based on consumer interest, but based on their own competitive interests.

Photo by Apple

In an article title “How the e-book landscape is becoming a walled garden”, Mathew Ingram discusses Apple’s decision to reject an e-book by Seth Godin because “it contains hyperlinks to books in the Amazon store”. The book wasn’t rejected because of content (its about Godin’s belief that public education needs to change) but because there was a conflict of interest for Apple.

Another example would be when Amazon blocked books from the distributor IPG because the company was trying to negotiate a new contract with Amazon. (Something similar occurred when Amazon locked out all Macmillan titles during a pricing negotiation.)

Interestingly enough, Apple and Amazon have different perspectives toward their e-book market. Apple sees the e-book as a form of content to be used to sell more iPads, whereas Amazon sees devices like the Kindle as a way to sell more content and books. However, both companies are still dependent on the consumer’s product loyalty.

Photo by Barnes & Noble

Seth Godin asserts that he does not expect a grocery store to carry every brand of cereal that he wants to buy because the grocery store would have to make certain business decisions what what cereal to put on the shelves. Seth Godin argues that bookstores should be different: “We’re heading to a world where there are just a handful of influential bookstores (Amazon, Apple, Nook…) and one by one, the principles of open access are disappearing. Apple, apparently, won’t carry an e-book that contains a link to buy a hardcover book from Amazon.”

Seth Godin points out that there are some open standards for e-books, such as ePub, but a majority of books still need to be bought and downloaded from the three major e-book publishing companies.