- 2018-10-19
Facebook trusts the webcast
Bringing so many people into the Internet is a huge challenge. It requires huge expenditures, even for large companies like Facebook. In order to increase this feature, Facebook spent hundreds of millions of dollars.
So why does Facebook take the risk of allowing every user to enjoy the live broadcast service? Because Zuckerberg trusts live streaming. At the F8 conference in April last year, he delivered a speech. The summary is as follows:
1. Video is occupying the Internet: In 2013, online video accounted for 60% of all Internet traffic, but by 2018 this proportion is expected to rise to 76%.
2. The live broadcast is more original and from the heart: "Because it is a live broadcast, it can't be managed." This makes people feel that live broadcast is more real, especially when compared to TV and other video platforms. We live in a world where more and more public events are carefully arranged. The live broadcast provides a tantalizing glimpse behind the scenes and is a way to communicate more openly in real time.
3. The entry barrier for live broadcast is very low: you can reach into your pocket, take out your phone, and start a live broadcast for 10 seconds. Doing live broadcast on Fcebook requires 3 taps using mobile apps. Someone once made a comparison between the iPhone 6S and the Nikon D750 SLR with a professional 24-70mm f/2.8 lens (this combination costs $3,000).
4. It is a two-way medium: there are similarities between live webcast and live TV. However, unlike TV, live webcasts exist on social media. You will be encouraged to comment, respond, or actively participate in interactions. Social media is a two-way medium.
Facebook Live is very successful in terms of interaction. According to Facebook’s own estimates, Facebook Live’s live video has 10 times more comments than standard videos.
5. Real-time video is the perfect way of emotional communication: This is why people in far corners of the world often use Skype and Facetime to keep in touch. Video allows you to participate in the lives of others. "We have created this huge technology platform, so over time, we can find and support the most personal, most emotional, most original and most heartfelt communication that people want. Way," Zuckerberg said.
The dark side of live streaming
Like most things, tools can be used to do good things, and they can be used to do terrible things. The explosion of video — a large part of which came from the hands of ordinary people rather than the news media, and therefore the content does not meet industry standards — exposes the public to a new level of online violence.
From sports games to the birth of a giraffe, the crazy growth of all kinds of live broadcasts has spawned an edge of evil, because murderers, rapists, and terrorists have found ways to disseminate videos-technology companies such as Facebook have been working hard to limit this content.
1. Live crime: Steve Stephens made a thriller video called "Easter Massacre." In the video, he walked to an old man he didn't know each other, asked him a question, and shot him. The victim was named Robert Godwin, 74 years old this year. Stephens broadcasted the crime process live on Facebook.
2. Live suicide: It's not just that murderers are on Facebook, but suicide videos are appearing more and more frequently. Last year, a French woman broadcasted her suicide in a live broadcast. Earlier this year, 12-year-old Georgian girl Katelyn Nicole Davis (Katelyn Nicole Davis) broadcasted her suicide online, and 14-year-old Miami girl Naka Weinett also The suicide process was broadcast live online.
Films in which men rape women have been restricted to tyrannical acts. However, now it appears in a dark or hidden area of the Internet and is forwarded privately. Take Ronina as an example. The extreme content she uploaded was reposted by a high school student and appeared on Twitter.
The content of the live broadcast cannot be well monitored
Zuckerberg promised that the world's top social network will not be used to spread the terrible behavior of a murderer who killed an old man on Easter Day. "We will work to build common ground, not just get more perspectives," Zuckerberg said. "We will do everything we can to prevent similar tragedies from happening again."
It took Facebook two hours to clear the content uploaded by Steven Stephens. By that time, the video had been viewed 150,000 times. Social media companies want live, cutting-edge, original, and attractive content that may cause viral effects. What they got was a live broadcast of extreme criminal violence. Such live broadcasts spread rapidly like a virus.
Do you plan to review all new and existing users to see if they can pass the criminal background check? impossible. Should all photos and food content be reviewed by Facebook employees before being published? To accomplish this task, you probably need to recruit one-third of the world's population. (Facebook uploads about 300 million photos every day, and the number of recorded videos and live broadcasts is similar to this level.)
Daniel Danker, Facebook Live’s product director, said: “We rely on the community to mark life moments that are unsafe or that don’t meet community standards. However, when it comes to live streaming, it’s extremely challenging because there is no time to respond,” he said. , "Things have already happened when you saw it." When users flag such content, the global professional team responded within 24 hours. However, critics pointed out that after these 24 hours, inappropriate videos have been viewed millions of times.
Zuckerberg can't stop such things, because he is not fighting technology-but human nature.