Network Effects and Facebook: Election 2016
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2016/11/breaking-news
Following the shocking 2016 presidential election, many media outlets have faced scrutiny for failing to produce accurate news throughout the election process. This article, in particular, examines the scrutiny brought against Facebook for failing to ensure the validity of news stories shared on the site. With more than two billion active monthly users, it is undeniable that Facebook carries enormous clout as a source of news. However, whether or not the news produced on the site can be relied upon is another question. It is a question that has even caused some investors to steer clear from the media giant as it works to get a handle on the situation. While Facebook continues to devise algorithms to ensure the validity of the new stories shared on the site, the article brings up the suggestion that users, also, need to rethink their own algorithms when it comes to sorting the news that shows up on their feed.
The final section of the article describes how Facebook, and other social networks, “thrive off network effects.” In other words as discussed in class, the site becomes increasingly valuable to users as more people use it. However, the lack of validity assurance and “intense political polarization” can actually lead to negative network effects. In this case, users are less motivated to use the site as their feeds become clogged with biased and often untrue news stories. Over the past few months, I have observed this phenomenon first-hand. Many close friends, have turned me away from Facebook as I continue to see them share news stories that skew the truth and consistently depict only one side of the story. The article writes, “Facebook’s success therefore depends on its being able to capitalise on positive network effects while allowing users to segregate themselves away from groups which would otherwise undercut the value of the network.” I could not agree more.