YouTube stomped TV in the second presidential debate
Did you choose to watch coverage of the second US presidential debate on your computer or phone instead of your TV? You’re not alone… in fact, you might be in the majority. YouTube reports that round two of Clinton versus Trump racked up 124 million worldwide views across live streams and on-demand videos, compared to ‘just’ 63 million TV viewers. That’s a roughly 40 percent jump over what YouTube saw in the last debate, although it’s notable that there were fewer concurrent viewers — the town hall debate saw a peak of 1.5 million versus 2 million the last time.
YouTube hasn’t explained what prompted the surge, although it’s easy to point to a few factors. For a start, the incendiary nature of the debate helped — people around the planet wanted to catch more of those outrageous statements, especially knowing what happened in the first debate. The 9PM Eastern timing also likely drove some viewers to YouTube recaps instead of watching live TV. The rise of cord-cutting may have played a part as well, although that would be difficult to quantify.
It’s important to add that this is only YouTube’s data, for that matter. Twitter says that the second debate saw over 17 million tweets, the most it had ever seen for a debate — and you know that some of those users watched the showdown on Twitter itself or other internet services, such as Facebook and news websites. TV is still a force to be reckoned with in debate coverage, but it’s not nearly as vital as it used to be.
Via: Wired
Source: YouTube Official Blog
Memes made the presidential debate great again
There’s something magical about an inside joke. A good inside joke reminds friends that no matter what happens, you’ll always have that moment when you were completely in sync, united by laughter and happy tears. Memes, meanwhile, are inside jokes on a massive scale. Memes remind the people involved of happier times, when an entire country or group of disparate people shared a moment of levity, something to laugh about, something adorable to bond over.
Throughout the cut-throat 2016 presidential election, citizens of the United States have been in dire need of a uniting force. And, during last night’s second presidential debate, the people found their common ground in an affable, red-sweatered meme named Ken Bone.
Last night, undecided voter Kenneth Bone asked presidential nominees Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton a question about their energy policies, and the internet fell in love. The combination of his cheery red sweater, black-framed glasses and caterpillar moustache resonated with viewers straight away, leading to hundreds of screenshots, Vines, videos and proclamations of admiration for America’s most famous undecided citizen.
Bone rode the wave to an appearance on CNN this morning (still donning that famous red sweater) and a Twitter following of more than 30,000 (and counting). The Ken Bone meme may not make sense on the surface — he’s just a man who asked a question about energy policies, after all — but that’s precisely the hallmark of a good inside joke. That’s the foundation of a viral meme.
Moreover, Bone’s journey to internet stardom demonstrates social media’s influence on the modern political process, while revealing how everyday Americans feel about this year’s tumultuous election.
In short, Americans are in need of a good inside joke.
Luckily for the country, modern technology has spawned the perfect ecosystem for breeding instant viral memes. First, it’s easier than ever to watch the presidential debate. Last night’s spectacle was aired live on television, broadcast on NPR and streamed on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and the websites of major media outlets. Plus, given this election’s extreme rhetoric and polarizing candidates, more people than ever are interested in watching these debates. The first presidential sparring match was the most-watched debate ever, securing an average of 84 million viewers on television alone.
Game recognize game https://t.co/Ktg824cjSP
— Phil Friend (@Phil_Friend) October 10, 2016
This means more people than ever are in on the joke. During a live event, a viral meme travels like wildfire, tapping into something resonant and true for a multitude of people and instantly spreading across Twitter, Facebook, Vine, Snapchat and other social media sources. Ken Bone wasn’t the only meme to come out of the second presidential debate — after all, it was the most-tweeted debate in US election history with 17 million people contributing to the conversation.
It certainly felt like the most memed debate ever: People added lyrics to still shots of Clinton and Trump holding up their microphones, as if they were singing a duet; they mocked Trump’s apparent inability to answer a question directly; they wondered what the hell Trump was doing loitering closely behind Clinton as she answered questions; they decided Trump was having sex with his chair, live on-stage.
However, Ken Bone was the night’s most ubiquitous meme, by far.
Perhaps that’s because he’s the safest. There’s nothing polarizing about Ken Bone. He’s a mustachioed man in a bright red sweater asking a question about energy policy. He’s the calm, collected optimist and hobbyist bird watcher inside all of us. Most of all, he’s a reprieve from the actual election. Ken Bone represents a chance for Americans to reach across the aisle and remind each other that we’re in this together. Or, at least, we’re laughing together. For now.
UK targets doxxing, hashtags and more in online troll crackdown
Over the course of the year, the UK government has attempted to crack down internet abuse by introducing new guidelines for prosecutors and forming a new troll-hunting police unit. Those updates ensured that anyone creating websites or fake online profiles with the intention to humiliate someone could be punished, but the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has today added a new list of offences aimed at bringing trolls to justice.
Prosecutors have been told that anyone indulging in “virtual mobbing” campaigns — where a person encourages others to target and abuse users on Twitter or Facebook — can now be charged under the Serious Crime Act 2007.
The CPS also wants to bring the hammer down on “doxxers,” where someone shares personal information like an address or telephone number to promote harassment of the victim. The hashtag, often seen as a way to bring people together for good causes, also makes the list. Now, if a social media user creates a “derogatory” hashtag with the intention to humiliate someone, they too can be charged under the same act.
The CPS also announced specific guidance on hate crimes and violence against women and girls. If a social media user is found to be “baiting” a person online by “labelling them as sexually promiscuous,” they will be charged. The same can be said of users who Photoshop or digitally alter images of people on Facebook, Twitter and other social apps with the intention to demean them.
“Social media can be used to educate, entertain and enlighten but there are also people who use it to bully, intimidate and harass,” says Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders. “Ignorance is not a defence and perceived anonymity is not an escape. Those who commit these acts, or encourage others to do the same, can and will be prosecuted.”
While the guidelines come into force today, they will be subject to a 13-week consultation. That consultation will include the subject of “sexting,” which the CPS said today will not become a prosecutable offence for people under the age of 18. Sexting isn’t considered to be in the public interest, as long as images aren’t sent under duress or in cases involving “exploitation, grooming or bullying.”
Via: BBC News
How to watch the second US presidential debate
The second US presidential debate promises to draw even more attention than the first. On top of giving Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump a chance to adjust their strategies, there’s a switch to a town hall format based on public questions. And then there’s both Trump’s video apology and Clinton’s leaked comments to banks — how will the candidates deal with these curveballs? Thankfully, there are plenty of ways to follow the drama online. We’ve aggregated many of the internet viewing options so that you won’t have to miss a moment when the debate kicks off at 9PM Eastern.
You practically know the drill by now — Facebook Live will play a major role in debate coverage, with numerous major news outlets using it as their streaming platform of choice. ABC News’ agreement with Facebook will make it the star of the show between its ad-free stream and viewer-influenced commentary, but it’s not the only choice. BuzzFeed, CNBC, C-SPAN, Fox News, the New York Times, PBS, Telemundo and Univision should also be streaming on Facebook, although the presentation you’ll get will certainly vary.
Twitter is once again determined to be a one-stop shop for live debate coverage. Its partnership with Bloomberg will deliver the debate itself, on-air analysis and the obligatory never-ending stream of tweets from viewers. You can watch on the web at debates.twitter.com, and Twitter’s official mobile apps will help you tune in when you’re on the move.
YouTube
You’d better believe that you’ll have an abundance of YouTube streams to watch. Bloomberg, Fox News, NBC News, PBS, Telemundo and the Washington Post should all have live feeds on Google’s video site, complete with commentary in many cases. And if you’re more interested in observation than raw candidate banter, outfits like Complex and The Young Turks can help you out.
Conventional media outlets
Naturally, some of the bigger names in conventional media are streaming the debate through their own portals alongside (or in some cases, instead of) third-party services. ABC News, CBS News, CNN, Fox Business and Reuters should have streams through their websites and mobile apps. As in previous debates, though, you may need to authenticate your TV subscription when using certain apps, such as ABC’s regular app.
Images: AP Photo/John Minchillo; AP Photo/Patrick Semansky; Reuters/Lucy Nicholson; AP Photo/John Locher
Sarah Nyberg’s Twitter bot feeds the emptiness of alt-right trolls
Engaging with “alt-right” Pepe-spewing racists on Twitter is a diversion I have yet to tire of, but the fact is even I can’t tweet enough satisfy the masses. Fortunately, automating the process is a viable option, as shown by writer Sarah Nyberg’s @Arguetron Twitter bot.
It’s not the first such scripted process to hit social media (according to Nyberg, her inspiration came from a number of similar bots created by Nora Reed including @opinions_good and @good_opinions.), but it does have a remarkably deep capability to create benign but baiting responses. One egg avatar’d tweeter determined to defend the honor of a not-as-popular-as-his-follower-count-suggests alt-righter went back and forth with Arguetron for about ten hours without catching on.
this infowars egg is the record holder
it argued with the bot for… almost TEN HOURS. yes, really. pic.twitter.com/DiQdNd8azw
— Sarah Nyberg (@srhbutts) October 6, 2016
It’s not exactly a coincidence that Nyberg has been able to create a language so familiar and responsive to these elements, as she was a member of the same online communities that birthed so many of them. Like many of us with a background in 90s/00s chatrooms and forums, the nature internet arguments comes easy, however, some of us grew up to temper that with some amount of respect for humanity in general. Some have not, and in a turn, Nyberg has been targeted by Gamergate-related harassment over the last couple of years.
Tweets by arguetron
Still, Arguetron is by design not abusive or malicious in its tweets, and does not actively seek out adversaries. That’s in contrast to some bots, like Nigel Leck’s 2010 project @AI_AGW, which hunted down global warming deniers to provide automated fact-based responses explaining the science. One Hacker News commenter described it at the time as a “pro-active search engine,” able to answer questions people didn’t even know they needed correcting on — particularly interesting given the current trend of messaging bots launched by Google, Facebook and others to do just that. Other examples include the SNAP_R bot that security researchers used to phish Twitter users, and @BrandLover7 which absolutely loves your product.
Thomas Kuhlenbeck
I chatted with Sarah, and she explained that a big part of the motivation is not to engage in harassing behavior, but to “expose reactionaries and harassers.” Since the bot doesn’t automatically tweet at anyone, it only picks arguments with the folks who are searching Twitter for keywords to argue. As she puts it, “I’d like the project to help people critically look at how toxic Twitter can be, especially for people expressing these kinds of opinions. That it also makes the people engaging in this sort of behavior looks ridiculous is a nice side effect.”
No matter what ends up happening to Twitter, it would be nice if whoever controls it took a look at these behaviors and applied it to addressing abuse on the platform. Unfortunately, I think there’s little indication that will happen under its current administration. Of course, if any of those Silicon Valley companies working on bots need a side project, assigning everyone an AI might be a worthwhile 20 percent project. While it can’t address the very real issues of stalking and harassment that affects our safety, at least this way trolls get the attention they so clearly crave and the rest of us keep the time they’re hoping to steal. It’s a win-win.
Source: Sarah Nyberg (Twitter)
Donald Trump’s video apology goes out over Facebook, Twitter
Hours after the Washington Post published a video of Donald Trump in 2005 stating, among other things, that “And when you’re a star, they let you do it…You can do anything. Grab them by the p—y,” the candidate issued a video response that went out over social media. Despite Trump’s reputation as a heavy Twitter user (in 2012 he tweeted “I love Twitter…. it’s like owning your own newspaper— without the losses.”) it was published first on Facebook and then later on Twitter.
Just another example of how different this election has been from any before, those platforms allow the campaign to reach followers en masse — more than 11 million on Facebook and 12 million on Twitter — without having to worry about annoyances like anchors or journalists asking questions. Even with a debate coming up Sunday night, there was no need to face questions tonight about women who report being assaulted by Trump in specifically the manner described; instead, the candidate focused on the husband of his opponent.
As social media giveth, it also taketh away, and discussion of the #TrumpTape has been spirited on all platforms. A number of prominent Republican politicians tweeted that the videotaped comments were “indefensible” and “despicable” with a few going so far as to withdraw endorsements for Trump or push for him to withdraw from the campaign. Senator Mike Lee of Utah responded with a Facebook Live broadcast from his own home — we’re sure a Periscope or two will be right behind.
Source: Donald Trump (Facebook)
NFL could fine its own teams for social media posts
Sports reputation as being DVR-proof has led some leagues to try and tightly control how and where their highlights show up online. While the NBA is relatively loose about allowing its clips on YouTube or Twitter, the NFL has gone after websites for posting video or GIFs before, and the Olympics banned outlets from posting GIFs this summer. Now, a leaked memo obtained by TheMMQB and Mashable reveals how the NFL can go after its own teams for posts by their social media accounts. Now, teams can be fined for exceeding the limits on video and any moving content (read: GIFs) posted during the 60 minutes before a game or during the game.
As noted by Pro Football Talk, these new rules actually loosen restrictions that had existed on using video from games, and recorded at the stadium on gameday. But the penalties put in place mean that for a first-time violation, a team could be fined $25,000 for an offending post, which ramps up to $50,000 the second time, and $100,000 plus the loss of rights to post league content for a third strike.
Mashable revealed that banned behavior includes tweeting video during the restricted time period, other than resharing video from official league accounts. While the ban on gametime GIFs (even for content that’s not from the game itself) could be reviewed going forward, it seems likely that your preferred team’s social media account will become a lot less personal while the game is happening. The big question however, is whether the NFL just wants more control over valuable game video and reach when the most people are paying attention, or if it’s worried about ratings that, through the first quarter of the season, have noticeable declined?
Source: TheMMQB, Mashable, Pro Football Talk
Does anyone want to buy Twitter?
At the end of September, the list of reported potential suitors for Twitter included Apple, Disney, Google and Salesforce. Based on new reports from Recode and CNBC, it sounds like none of those companies are interested in buying the social network at this point. Recode’s sources indicated this week that Google wasn’t preparing to make a bid and that Apple wasn’t likely to do so either. It followed that up with a report that Disney, after exploring a potential proposal, wouldn’t move forward with an official offer. Twitter’s shareholders surely aren’t happy about those big names withdrawing interest as the company’s stock fell 9 percent yesterday.
Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff downplayed his company’s interest in Twitter during an interview with CNBC yesterday as well. The chief executive said that while he considers a lot of potential acquisitions, he ultimately decides to pass on most of them. Benioff didn’t comment specifically on Twitter, but noted that “it’s in our interest to look at everything.”
According to Reuters, Twitter wants to wrap the sale process by October 27th, the day it’s scheduled to announce its Q3 earnings. That news follows a Bloomberg article that detailed the internal battle at Twitter over the potential sale, including that CEO Jack Dorsey is reportedly holding up the process because he wants the company to remain independent. Twitter does have some untapped potential on top of its social network and newly cemented live video push, but it looks like getting a deal done before the end of the month may be a lot harder than it seemed just a week ago.
Apple, Google, Disney Unlikely to Bid for Twitter Buyout, Claims Report
Twitter shares took a tumble yesterday following reports that neither Apple nor Google are interested in making a bid for the social media company.
Last month, Twitter shares rose 20 percent after rumors emerged that it had received takeover approaches from several tech giants and that its board of directors was open to a deal, which could come by the end of this year.
But according to sources who spoke to Recode yesterday, Twitter should have “low expectations” of receiving an offer from Apple, while Google – hitherto considered its most likely suitor – is no longer moving forward with an effort to buy at this time. Disney, which had also considered a bid, has also ruled itself out.
That leaves American cloud computing company Salesforce in the driving seat for a potential acquisition, but the firm has so far refused to comment publicly on speculation that it is considering a buy.
Twitter is said to be eager to wrap up any deal before its quarterly earnings report on October 27, but the latest share slump suggests investors are wringing their hands over the likelihood of a firm buy offer any time soon.
For the last two years Twitter has been searching for ways to attract new users as the growth and profitability of rival social media companies like Snapchat and Facebook continue to outpace it.
In June, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey suggested Twitter can be somewhat confusing and alienating to its install base in comparison, but it remains to be seen whether its recent flurry of additional features will do enough to change that perception.
Critics remain skeptical and advertiser interest in Twitter has waned as a result, while the company has endured internal turmoil in recent years with a revolving door of executives and board members.
Tag: Twitter
Discuss this article in our forums
Reuters: Twitter seeks a sale decision by October 27th
Twitter’s flat growth and falling profits made for a dim outlook until a few weeks ago when sources close to the social media platform said that Google, Salesforce and other tech luminaries were looking to buy it. The company’s stock jumped 20 percent that day, and speculation has continued as to which would be the best buyer. But it seems time is of the essence: Twitter wants to conclude sale deliberations before October 27th, the day it reports its third quarter earnings, sources told Reuters.
Binding acquisition offers are due in two weeks, the sources noted. Salesforce is in the running, which could mine Twitter’s data for business intel, while Disney might make a bid to use its social media platform to boost outreach for its programming. While Google was considered a prominent potential buyer, separate sources told Recode that the search giant won’t make a bid. Apple isn’t likely to enter the fray either.
But it’s possible that even Twitter isn’t solid on what Twitter wants to do. Bloomberg reported today that three head executives are split: CEO Jack Dorsey wants to remain independent, co-founder Ev Williams wants to sell, with chief financial officer Anthony Noto stepped in to seize more control of the company amid Dorsey’s passive leadership.
But this whole process might not even result in a sale, Reuters’ sources cautioned. Regardless, concluding negotiations with any buyer before October 27th is an incredibly aggressive deadline. At the very least, it will likely define where Twitter is going before it has to report what is likely its 12th consecutive quarter without producing net profit as a public company.
Source: Reuters
AIVAnet 