As Online Video Surges, Publishers Turn to Automation
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
One thing that strikes me is that these auto-generated videos add no additional information to news reports; they merely present the content in a different way.
While that may be a way to broaden consumption of the content -- the auto-playing videos on Facebook feeds is a good example -- I don't think it does much to change readers'/viewers' perception of the quality of that content. If anything, it has the potential to cause them to perceive it as of lower quality than if they'd just read the article it was based on.
I see this as the next version of slideshows. News orgs used to like them because each new slide could be treated as a new page view. But readers found them to be, at best, of little additional value, and at worst, really frustrating to get through.
What news orgs really need is to invest resources to automate things that increase readers' perception of quality, and then figure out a way to monetize them, rather than looking at ways to monetize and then figuring out how to package content to fit the monetization strategy.
One initiative that can do that -- and this is where I think more resources should be invested -- is data science. Sifting through large public datasets and identifying trends, aberrations, etc. is something a computer can do as well or better than a human, and I would imagine that the fruits of those investments would be ripe for monetization.
Just one example: We have become conditioned to expect news content to be free, but we're more willing to pay for services. So imagine a news org that said, "Hey, we'll let you view all of our articles for free ... but then for a dollar a pop, you can sign up to receive an instant email notification when we publish a follow-up to a story you are interested in." I'd pay $1 to get notifications of follow-up stories to a particularly enthralling court case, or some local news of significant relevance to me. Best part is, news orgs already largely have the metadata that would make such a service work. They just need to invest in making computers do the work.
Auto generated video is just a grab for using press release content for auto play video ads. Upon closer inspection, there is really no business left. It looks more like Demand Media's content farm now, to see who can provide the thinnest layer between traffic source & advertiser. The business I see is Google/FB providing the audience and Google/FB providing the advertisers. Making a higher quantity of videos no one wants to see is not going to recapture ad dollars from some kid playing a video game that an audience wants to see.
The only thing that amazes me is how many big publishers, including popular tech blogs, are able to run sites which barely function on a late model iPhone. I have no idea what metrics they are looking at. The past few months I've gone back to RSS feeds and bloggers so I can get readable content again.
An end to my worthless rant is publishers will probably have to deal with less glamour and focus on producing extremely high quality content that users will pay for. Most verticals have no market for paid content. Those probably have to turn in to donor based non-profits or business models shift to selling products.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-03/advertisin...
From your experience what makes you think people would be willing to pay? Wouldn't you need a massive user base consuming hard to create local content like what Patch was supposed to be? http://patch.com/
It's very probable that they would make just a fraction of the advertising revenue they were making before and free notification services will pop up.
On a side note, is there a way to disable these videos? I do not believe in blocking ads since a publisher should have a monetary gain for producing content, but I do NOT want video. Ever. Unless it is Youtube or Vimeo and the like of course.
At most, they'll have slides that lack critical content from the lecture.
0.0.0.0 player.theplatform.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 link.theplatform.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 ci-2862d2c8d6-68f418d2.http.atlas.cdn.yimg.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 big.assets.huffingtonpost.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 ht1.cdn.turner.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 ht2.cdn.turner.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 ht3.cdn.turner.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 ht4.cdn.turner.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 ht5.cdn.turner.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 ht6.cdn.turner.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 ht7.cdn.turner.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 ht8.cdn.turner.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 ht9.cdn.turner.com # Autoplay video
Alternatively, uMatrix should allow you to globally blacklist, then optionally whitelist same.https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/06/...
Several years ago, a developer at the Los Angeles Times (part of Tribune Publishing) created one of the most simple yet useful examples of automated journalism: Quakebot https://source.opennews.org/en-US/articles/how-break-news-wh...
Quakebot still has a byline and its own section on the LAT website [0], but it remains mostly unchanged since its first reveal (perhaps its implementation is more automated, but its public output is about the same). That Quakebot -- and all the other ways that public data can be efficiently harnessed as a service to readers and reporters alike -- isn't talked about in Tronc's buzzword-heavy press releases about machine learning and artificial intelligence is, IMHO, indicative of Tronc's questionable aims and viability.
[0] http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-earthquakesa-earthq...
The National Weather Service has an API endpoint [1] which returns weather forecasts in XML. Put in a latitude and longitude, and it calculates a forecast for that location. The data is returned in a structured format. This is the underlying data for most weather sites. One XML item is <wordedForecast>, which looks like this:
WEATHER FORECAST FOR 2 MILES SE SAN JOSE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
CA ON JULY 11TH AT 2:34 AM.
TODAY, JULY 11TH: SUNNY, WITH A HIGH NEAR 81. NORTHWEST WIND 6
TO 16 MPH, WITH GUSTS AS HIGH AS 21 MPH.
TONIGHT, JULY 11TH: MOSTLY CLEAR, WITH A LOW AROUND 55. NORTH
WIND 16 TO 21 MPH DECREASING TO 7 TO 12 MPH AFTER MIDNIGHT.
WINDS COULD GUST AS HIGH AS 26 MPH.
That's what you hear in broadcast radio weather broadcasts.[1] http://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?lat=%1.4f&lon=%1.4f... (fill in lat and lon).
That "robot voice" is relatively new. Not that long ago, it was a tape loop of a person reading the forecast, played over and over and updated every few hours. Definitely into the late 90s I think.
In my childhood home we had a radio with a "weather" button that, when pressed, would turn the radio on and tune it to one of the standard NOAA frequencies for a set amount of time (probably about a minute or so). It was astonishingly useful, on par with the Amazon Echo I have today and use for a similar purpose, but with probably six orders of magnitude fewer transistors involved. Simple, but effective.
I think one can say with confidence that nobody really wants to watch automatically generated title and clip art videos. Which means this trend will soon pass.
No, it's awful. In the "what media people like to consume" business that's still a useful metric.
To whom? Most people I know are more incensed at autoplaying video on their smartphones even more than on the desktop. Their audio is more likely to be turned up on their phone, and it's harder to turn it off, which is what most people immediately do.
It is like a more advanced version of old school blackhat SEO scripts which would scrape content and then mash it up so it would appear original and unique to Google. In some cases these publishers may not even have real humans watching those ads.
If it reads like the "America InAction" definition of Corporate Robotocracy, feel good that it's least a more likely dystopian future than nuclear holocaust.
Maybe they could try to apply this kind of technique to improve their auto-generated articles to the point where they can't be distinguished from those created by humans, and at the same time, fool the FB bots which filter the feeds.
But I understand, from a business perspective, the appeal of:
- preroll ads, which are (as of this moment) harder to block than other types of ads
- the promise of organic 'virality' brought upon by a visually stimulating format
- the desire to use automation to cut down on the human element of producing such converted content