Facebook and Google seem like very different cases to me. The core business of Facebook has always been family and friends interaction, with content made specifically for FB (similarly Instagram, though Meta should be forced to divest one of them). Its role as a news aggregator largely reflected the fact that it was the main social medium before the arrival of Twitter and now the Substack, Mastodon etc. Now there's no need for that role, and it's going back to happy snaps.
By contrast, Google's core business relies entirely on content created by others, selected in a way to support Google's advertisers. That's deeply problematic, in a way that's not exclusively a problem for media.
Facebook and Google seem like very different cases to me. The core business of Facebook has always been family and friends interaction, with content made specifically for FB (similarly Instagram, though Meta should be forced to divest one of them). Its role as a news aggregator largely reflected the fact that it was the main social medium before the arrival of Twitter and now the Substack, Mastodon etc. Now there's no need for that role, and it's going back to happy snaps.
By contrast, Google's core business relies entirely on content created by others, selected in a way to support Google's advertisers. That's deeply problematic, in a way that's not exclusively a problem for media.
Good article Tim.
Also, I agree that Denise’s True North newsletter is excellent!
Great article Tim. Lots to think about and get my head around. Cheers.
"Still, if you follow Denise Shrivell’s new TrueNorth newsletter (which I hope you do)"
Well I do now. Thanks for the link Tim.