@gbhnews Mastodon is my primary way of finding out about the news. I follow some news organizations and some terrific reporters — and then of course people share links to important and/or interesting news articles. Some people are basically curators of news on specific topics, such as the environment and the climate crisis and I appreciate their work!
Short answer: I think there is good news visibility.
For me there are 2 types: Major org feeds which are still a bit lacking here and then linked articles from people I follow
I have no issue or desire to just stay within Fediverse and not link out
One of the things I have enjoyed is discussing articles here. Many news sites no longer have open comments. Here with the smaller audience and their nature it usually is a real discussion
@gbhnews#boston's fediverse news visibility is massively improved by your consistently showing up. As a 'social space', we're still figuring out how things should work.
@gbhnews It reflects an aspect of my larger Mastodon experience: there are big benefits to the simple reverse-chronological, people-and-hashtags-you-follow model, but a drawback is that more prolific posters drown others out. I see some news when everyone is talking about/retooting it, but miss many things. One day I'd like to set up some kind of "news view" that's more tailored, so I can choose if I'm feeling generally social or feeling like seeing what people are saying about some news.
@gbhnews It's a weak spot. RSS bots mean we're well provided for with headline news feeds, but we need more journalists here. Really appreciate your work!
News visibility is fine here, I'd say. Even excessive! Which is why I'm more concerned about curation than visibility.
Thus, GBH News is the only general news source I follow because it's the only one I know with enough restraint to post just a few times a day. That's good curation.
GBH News's highlight, of course, is a digest-like morning post listing the top headlines of the past 24 hours. Thank you for that; and thanks even more for the posts you could submit here, but don't.
@setsly I hear you. One of the main reasons I post the way I do is mechanical: none of the tools I use to manage other, high volume accounts, actually connect to Mastodon;
As a result, this account MUST be hand done. I can really only come over once a day in the morning. The rest of the day I am very busy with all the things!
That said, news orgs won't invest if they think people on a platform won't engage with their work, so it's an impasse.
@gbhnews
I think it’s getting better all the time. I don’t mind links that send me elsewhere as long as there is enough in the snippet to give me a good idea of what the article is about. Being directed to paywalled articles w/o a gift link annoys me.
I hate click bait and being directed to sites that have so many pop-up ads you can’t read the article.
@PandaChronicle OMG I hate that too. I use a lot of reader software (in part because of a visual impairment I have). We are public media, so we don't have 85 popups etc.
@PandaChronicle that's not us 😁 that's that college radio station down the block (WBUR). But you're right, the Tappet Brothers were a national treasure.
@PandaChronicle It's okay! I do want to point out that we won the softball championship and had to physically go over there and reclaim the trophy 😂. (GBH and WBUR have an annual softball game).
@gbhnews Good and improving as more journalists and orgs join. Mastodon has no algorithm, so the viral engagement found on Twitter is unlikely. Separately, Threads is deprioritizing news to measurable effect. While it has an algorithmic timeline, it won’t deliver the same news engagement as Twitter. Ultimately, Mastodon may be the best place for news, since any number of networks can federate, Twitter is declining, and Threads doesn’t want news. Peak clicks are probably in the past though.
@gbhnews Based on what Meta has said and your own data, I think you’re right not to invest lots of effort on Threads. Meta’s financials have shown that the absence of news hasn’t harmed revenue. Its presence has created a lot of political and regulatory pressure, domestic and abroad. Also, countries have compelled Facebook to pay for content posted by publishers. Separating any moral arguments about Threads’ obligation to carry news, it’s in Meta’s business interests to lessen its visibility.
@bretcarmichael (we also consider social to be a "top of funnel" phenomenon and don't consider clicks to be the only/primary way to measure what we are doing. Most social platforms want to keep the users on that platform, not to leave to an external website).
@wifsten It is gradual, and in a way, I think that's behind the relatively slow uptick in news orgs. over here. It really is a perception/real numbers thing.
If I had to justify being here strictly on the numbers, I probably wouldn't be here. I don't, so...here I am 😁
@gbhnews@wifsten it's slooowly getting better but there are too few orgs and not enough individuals. Y'all do a good job but wish there was more. Also wish more orgs included shareable Mastodon options alongside other platforms.
@nlowell Almost all (centralized, algorithmic) social platforms have become "on platform" experiences because the companies that own them want users to stay on the platform and not depart for another website.
Expectations on non-algorithmic platforms like this one...users are here and want to stay here.
Combined, it makes it hard to justify investing. (Not impossible but hard).
I hear you about the paywall thing; Medium links irk me. We are public media and so no paywall/no registration.
Medium and Substack are both on my "dead to me" list.
But even the walled gardens - as much as they want to fence users in - have been turned into advertainment venues for too many people who just want to talk at people, not with them.
GBH was a go-to when I lived in Maine. Boston feels a long way off from the High Plains of Colorado. Luckily, I have CPR here.