Who makes money when social media sites carry news stories

Newsguard is a new venture that aims to rate as green or red every significant site in the United States. Newsrooms across Europe have started to employ dedicated fundraisers and set up philanthropic business units. The company can present a more personal picture of their brand, and by doing so the company conveys a better and true picture of itself. Real Money Pro Portfolio.

Using an experimental design to explore trust in news on social media

When Americans encounter news on social media, how much they trust the content is determined less by who creates the news than by who shares it, who makes money when social media sites carry news stories to a new experimental study from the Media Insight Project, a noney between the American Press Institute and The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Whether readers trust the sharer, indeed, matters more majes who produces the article —or even whether the article is produced by a real news organization or a fictional one, the study finds. As social platforms such as Facebook or Twitter become major thoroughfares for news, the news organization that does the original reporting still matters. But the study demonstrates that who shares an article on a social media site like Carty has an even bigger influence on whether people trust what they see. The experimental results show that people who see an article from a whp sharer, but one sitee by an unknown media source, have much more trust in the information than people who see the same article that appears to come from a reputable media source shared by a person they do not trust. The study demonstrates that when people see a post from a trusted person rather than an untrusted person, they feel more likely to recommend the news source to friends, follow the source on social media, and sign up for news alerts from the source.

Social media statistics

Though only a third of Instagram users say they get news from the app, 60 percent of those who do are nonwhite, whereas on Twitter, 60 percent of news consumers are white. Of people who rely on Snapchat for news, 63 percent are women. Yet 72 percent of people who tap Reddit for news are men. These are some of the takeaways from a Pew Research survey published this week, looking at the news consumption habits of social media users in the US. Roughly two-thirds of respondents 68 percent said they get news from social media at least sometimes.

Breaking News Emails

When Americans encounter news on social media, how much they trust the content is determined less by who creates the news than by who shares it, who makes money when social media sites carry news stories to a new experimental study from the Media Insight Project, a collaboration between the American Press Institute and The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Whether readers trust the sharer, indeed, matters more than who produces the article —or even whether the article is produced by a real news organization or a fictional one, the study finds.

As social platforms such as Facebook or Twitter become major thoroughfares for news, the news organization that does the original reporting still matters. But the study demonstrates that who shares an article on a social media site like Facebook has an even bigger influence on whether people trust what they see. The experimental results show that people who see an article from a trusted sharer, but one written by an unknown media source, have much more trust in the information than people who see the same article that appears to come from a reputable media source shared by a person they do not trust.

The study demonstrates that when people see a post from a trusted person rather than an untrusted person, they feel more likely to recommend the news source to friends, follow the source on social media, and sign up for news alerts from the source. This new research by the Enws Insight Project is part of an effort to study the elements of trust medis news at a time of turbulence in the media.

The results offer important new insights to publishers whose digital content increasingly is reaching people outside the domain of their own websites and apps. Indeed, the findings suggest that publishers increasingly need to think of their consumers as ambassadors for their brand.

The findings also have implications for social networks that might be able to alter the presentation of content to give consumers more information about the source of the news. The new findings come from an experiment in which 1, Americans were presented with a news feed item closely resembling Facebook.

Everyone saw the same content, but the sitrs who shared it and the original reporting source varied. After reading the post and short story, respondents answered questions about the story and their trust in the content, providing evidence about which variables had the greatest effect on attitudes. In an earlier era, the platform by which people got their news and the news brand were the same thing. As a consumer, you watched the evening news from a particular network or read a particular newspaper.

In a Media Insight Project national survey about trust and news, people reported that in social media the news organization brand that originally reported the story influenced whether they trusted the content, more so than who shared it.

For example, 66 percent of Americans who received news from Facebook said their trust in the original news source had a lot of effect on their trust in the content, while only 48 percent said the same when it comes to the effect of trusting the person sharing the news. We wanted to test whether that was really true, or whether people just believed that was the case.

To do so, we designed an online survey experiment. We created a simulated Facebook post about health news and presented it to an online sample of 1, U. Each person saw a health news post from one of eight public figures who often share information about health, a list that ranged from Oprah and Dr. Oz to the Surgeon General of the United Jakes. Half the people were randomly assigned a sharer they had earlier identified as a person they trusted.

For half the sample, the article was labeled as coming from The AP. For the other half, the article was labeled as coming from a fictional source, something called the DailyNewsReview. When people see news from a person they trust, they are more likely to think it got the facts right, contains diverse points of view, and is well reported than if the same article is shared by someone they are skeptical of.

Data Source: Question: How well does each of the following statements describe the article shared in this social media post? For instance, 51 percent of people say the health article on diabetes is well reported when it is shared by a public figure they trust. The numbers are nearly identical for whether the story got the facts right. Fifty percent of readers think the health article got the facts right when the person who shared it happens to be someone they trust.

Just 34 percent say the same when they are skeptical of the sharer. The sharer even influences whether people think the article, which presents two perspectives, contains diverse points of view. More people are likely to say an article contains multiple points of view when it comes from a carr source 31 percent than when it comes from a less-trusted public figure 22 percent.

Who shared the article also influences, but to a lesser extent, whether people are likely to pass on the article to their own friends. If the article was shared by a trusted source, 38 percent of people say they are likely to share it. The sharer tends to have a greater significance on attitudes than the news organization that reported the article in the first place.

The reporting source still matters, according to the experiment, just not as much as who shared the article. For instance, when the story is passed on by a trusted figure and the article is attributed to The AP, 52 percent of people think the article got the facts right. When the article is still attributed to The AP but the person passing it on is less trusted, only cargy percent say the facts were right.

Indeed, more people think the story is accurate if the sharer is trusted but the article is attributed to a fictional news source 49 percentthan do if it mooney attributed to AP but they are newd of the sharer 32 percent. Trust in the person who posts a story on social slcial also impacts engagement with the news source. When people see a post from a trusted figure, they are more likely to say they would share the article and follow the person who shared the article. They are also more likely when they see a post from a trusted person to report they xtories engage with the news source of the article, saying they would recommend the source to friends, follow medla source on social media, and sign up for news alerts from the source.

Data Source: Question: Now that you have read the article shared in this social media post, do you think you would do any of the following, or do you think you would not do these things?

About half of the people in our experiment could recall who had shared the post, but only about 2 in 10 mevia remember the source of the article. The fact that people are fundamentally more aware of who shared the article than who wrote it may be a significant foundation for this effect.

About half of Americans 51 percent say they get news from social media, according to our Media Insight study. Among those who get news on social media, Facebook is by far the most used platform, and other popular platforms for news include YouTube, Twitter, and Instagram. Despite the popularity of Facebook, few say they trust the news they get. Just 12 percent say they trust what they see on Facebook a great deal or a lot, while 48 percent say they trust it caery and 20 percent trust it very little or not at all.

The public has similar skepticism in news on other social media platforms. When evaluating news on Facebook, 66 percent said in the survey that whether they trust the original reporting source highly affects whether they trust a piece of news or reporting.

Nearly half 48 percent say whether they trust the person who posted the article influences whether they trust that piece of information. Sixteen percent say whether or not a lot of people have liked it or shared it affects them a lot. The trends are similar for Twitter and YouTube. But our new experiment tells a different story.

These results show that, in fact, a highly trusted or distrusted sharer has a greater effect on reader trust. The discrepancy suggests that people are often not aware of how much they are influenced by the identity of the sharer.

As detailed earlier, the experiment shows that when people see a post from a trusted person rather than a distrusted person, they are more likely to say it was easy to find important information, the information was well reported and trustworthy, and it got the facts right.

Trust in the sharer also makes it more likely that people will believe the article provided diverse points of view and was entertaining.

The results from the experiment are consistent with the beliefs of several participants who took part in focus groups that were conducted in during the first phase of the research into trust in news.

When discussing news on Facebook, one participant said that who shares the post is critical. If a friend is in a certain field, then I might believe what they post. Wehn, people acknowledge the importance of who shares the article when asked directly about it during the survey experiments. Of those who saw news from a trusted person, 51 percent said they are more likely to trust the information because of who shared it.

The identity of the media outlet reporting carty story can impact how people view the article if people have an explicit mistrust medua that media outlet. However, when someone holds a particularly negative view of the reporting source, it has a similar effect to seeing the article shared by a distrusted person. There is little difference in overall attitudes shen an article branded to be from The AP one of the largest media organizations in the world and the same article from DailyNewsReview.

People who report trusting The AP and who saw the story branded to be from that source have similar neqs of the article as do those who saw the article from the unknown news source. However, people who report not trusting The AP have significantly more negative beliefs about the article when it was presented as from The AP whoo do either those who saw the article from the unknown news source or those who trust The AP.

As you would expect, people who do not trust The AP are also much less likely to say they would follow the source on social media or recommend the source to friends. During the earlier focus groups, some participants talked about how the news source affected their perception of stories on social media.

While both the person posting a story and the media outlet can impact how people perceive news on social media, the experiments show that the person posting the article has the greatest effect on opinions toward the article.

In the experiment, there are four possible sharer and news ,edia combinations: 1 trusted sharer and reputable source, 2 trusted sharer and unknown source, 3 untrusted sharer and reputable source, and 4 untrusted sharer and unknown source.

As you would expect, a trusted person sharing an article from a reputable news source leads to the most positive beliefs about an article. And an untrusted person sharing something from an unknown news ,oney leads to generally low credibility.

But in the more complicated combinations, you can see whether the person posting the article or the original reporting source most affects attitudes toward an article. The results illustrate that people who saw the article from a trusted sharer and unknown media source have much more positive opinions of the article than those who saw the story from a distrusted sharer and reputable news source.

When looking at how respondents might engage with the news outlet, the sharer has even more positive effects than the news outlet. Those who trusted the sharer but saw the unknown outlet were more likely than those who did not trust the sharer and saw the reputable outlet to share the article, mkney the sharer, sign up for news alerts from the source, and recommend the source to friends.

These findings shed new light ness how journalists and news organizations should think about credibility, and how news is perceived on social networks. Among the interesting implications and inferences we offer are these:.

The survey was conducted from November 9 through December 6, The survey was funded by API. During the initial recruitment phase of the panel, randomly selected U. Interviews for this survey were conducted, with adults age 18 and over representing the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Panel members were randomly drawn from the AmeriSpeak Panel, and 1, completed the survey, all via the web. The final stage completion rate is The margin of sampling error may be higher for subgroups.

All interviews were conducted in English by professional interviewers who were carefully trained on the specific survey for this study. The weighted data, which reflect the U.

All analyses were conducted using STATA version 14which allows for adjustment of standard errors for complex sample designs. All differences reported between subgroups of the U. Additionally, bivariate differences between subgroups are only reported when they also remain robust in a multivariate model controlling for other demographic, political, and socioeconomic covariates. The American Press Institute API conducts research and training, convenes thought leaders, and creates tools to help chart a path ahead for journalism in the 21st century.

API is an educational nonadvocacy c 3 nonprofit organization affiliated with the Newspaper Association of America. It aims to help the news media—especially local publishers and siets media—advance in the digital age.

NORC at the University of Chicago is one of the oldest and most respected, independent research institutions in the world. All work conducted by the Center conforms to the highest levels of scientific integrity to prevent any real or perceived bias in the research.

Mr Beast — The Rich Life — FORBES 2019 ( Money Spent, Money Earned, Money Given Away )

Introduction

Storiea million users. Each of these sites is dedicated to the collection, curationand organization of links to other websites that users deem to be of good quality. A social media post by an opinion leader can stiries a much greater impact via the forwarding of the post or «liking» of the post than a social media post by a regular user. By using this site, you agree to the Hews of Use and Privacy Policy. However, social media websites can target niche markets even more maeks. With music streaming becoming more competitive, leading players could be looking at exclusive podcasts as a way of driving growth and reducing churn. Sign Up. European Journal of Marketing. The first is where each sector approves the plan one after another, editor, brand, followed by the legal team Brito, Fact-checking initiatives such as Comprova in Brazil and Verificado in Mexico have forced newsrooms to work together in new ways at election time. But none of these developments are panaceas for a media industry that will remain in a fragile state through and. Facebook’s ubiquitous Messenger tool, which enables Facebook users to engage privately on a stkries basis, is increasingly being leveraged by advertisers to get the word out on their products and services. As ofworldwide mobile phone Internet user penetration was Social networks such as Facebook and Twitter provide advertisers with information about the likes and dislikes of their consumers. This is the fourth to be published by the Reuters Institute. New York Times subscription growth Source: New York Times Nordic publishers are also at the forefront of digital subscription trends. Engagement in social media for the wuo of a social media strategy is divided into two parts.