Apple and Facebook are both NPR sponsors, and the story gives both sides equal time. That’s not necessarily good for Facebook.
Two soundbites rom Bobby Allyn’s “Why Is Facebook Launching An All-Out War On Apple’s Upcoming iPhone Update?” posted Friday:
Tim Cook: At a moment of rampant disinformation, and conspiracy theories juiced by algorithms, we can no longer turn a blind eye to a theory of technology that says all engagement is good engagement.
Mark Zuckerberg: I find [the] argument — that if you’re not paying, that somehow we can’t care about you — to be extremely glib and not at all aligned with the truth.
Cue the 3:55-minute segment:
My take: Sometimes equal time works.
Of course that share entails the most well heeled, most liable to buy portion of smartphone users, and that if Facebook lost access to those customers it’s loss of revenue would be greater than 22%.
Most won’t care about being tracked.
Ol’ Zuck shouldn’t sweat it so much.
(to the unaware — Fear Of Missing Out)
Kind of a surprise for NPR. Giving both sides equal time has not been their strong point.
I also concur with Kirk’s comment above that Mr. Zuck shouldn’t sweat it so much, because I’m fairly certain a lot of people will elect to allow information sharing rather than give up Facebook. In a sense, this will be a good test of the power of Facebook’s brand.
I call it – covering their …
I doubt if they’ve ever had a sponsor on each side of the fence.
They have NOT been diligent about ensuring the safe use of the data they sell. More importantly, he knows this and and does NOT “care” – using his words.
Since most users will NOT opt for privacy, his small business are NOT harmed. He knows this and deliberately plays on his vulnerable customers, like the one quoted.
The internet is NOT going increasing to paid subs. Video and other content streaming are moving from more expensive subscriptions elsewhere, to lower cost options on the internet. Non-paid internet services are exploding.