Facebook Wants to Skip the Off-Site Links, Host News Content Directly

The Wall Street Journal, in a report also cited by The Next Web and others, reports that Facebook is to soon begin acting not just as a conduit for news links pasted onto users' timelines (and leading to articles hosted elsewhere) but also as a host for the articles themselves. From the WSJ article: To woo publishers, Facebook is offering to change its traditional revenue-sharing model. In one of the models under consideration, publishers would keep all of the revenue from ads they sell on Facebook-hosted news sites, the people familiar with the matter said. If Facebook sells the advertisement, it would keep roughly 30% of the revenue, as it does in many other cases. Another motivation for Facebook to give up some revenue: It hopes the faster-loading content will encourage users to spend more time on its network. It is unclear what format the ads might take, or if publishers will be able to place or measure the ads they sell within Facebook. It seems likely Facebook would want publishers to use its own advertising-technology products, such as Atlas and LiveRail, as opposed to those offered by rivals such as Google Inc.

Comments

Given the high censorship of existing posts...

[Bomarc]

Given that they (Facebook) currently censor many posts, given that they continually force us to view "most popular" (by their arbitrary ranking) ... why should we trust their "news" ?
I wish those that use it ... would find another medium.

It's all about the spamvertising

[msobkow]

Cue the Monty Python skits, 'cause it's all about the spam spam spam spam spam.

Not the content. Not keeping articles current. Not making sure you can share links *outside* Facebook if you so choose.

But spam. Unending, unyielding, inflexible barrages of "advertising".

If they sent out leaflets instead of banner ads, my house would be ceiling deep in the shit, even with AdBlock Plus running.