The vast majority of Facebook and Twitter users are accessing their feeds on mobile devices, according to surprising new numbers. Facebook revealed that 78% of its daily active users in the US are visiting via mobile devices. For Twitter, 76% of its US users will visit the service on mobile this year, according to new estimates from eMarketer.
And here’s a mind-boggling stat: if you calculate how much time people spend reading stories inside Facebook’s app — in the browser that opens when you tap a story — Facebook has become the most popular browser across iOS and Android devices. That’s right, more than Safari and Chrome.
With mobile dominating social, I’m still surprised at how much desktop content is showing up in my feeds. Everything we share on Facebook and Twitter should be optimized for a mobile experience — primarily for phones — because that’s how most people are reading or watching it.
In fact, Facebook even suggests redefining how we measure success. “A lot of people focus on monthly active users or even registered users to demonstrate their size and scale. We think this is becoming on old way of looking at the media world,” Facebook said in a statement. The new metric that matters? Daily active users on mobile.
“Obituaries for Steve Jobs often list the industries whose fates he altered. But he did not disrupt those industries, I’d argue: He came in with solutions to problems at a time when they had already been disrupted.”— Owen Thomas in ReadWrite.
What media companies can learn from Facebook's unbelievable mobile growth
Just last summer, Mark Zuckerberg was hammered with questions about mobile monetization — which was zero — and he promised to improve Facebook’s crappy mobile app. Then the company’s IPO fell flat. Fast forward to this summer, and Facebook’s new mobile numbers should make your head spin:
- 41% of total ad revenue is mobile, up 30% from last quarter. - 70% of monthly active users visit via mobile, up 51% year-over-year. - 19% of monthly active users are mobile ONLY (219 million of ‘em). - Oh, and Facebook has more than 1 million active advertisers.
The first number alone is astounding (that comes out to $656 million), and Facebook’s stock is skyrocketing. How did Facebook engineer such a rapid mobile turnaround, and what can media companies learn from it?
For starters, I’ll quote author David Burkus: “Innovation isn’t an idea problem, it’s a recognition problem.” At first, you have to believe. Zuckerberg recognized that his company’s future hinged on mobile, and he followed it up with aggressive action. Here’s what he did, according to stories in Fortune and Fast Company as well as posts on Facebook’s engineering page:
- Announced to staff that Facebook’s top priority is becoming a mobile company. - Reorganized the company to embed mobile engineers in all product teams, making every product head responsible for mobile. - Turned off Facebook.com internally for a week, forcing staff to use mobile apps. - Abandoned Facebook’s hybrid apps and rebuilt them from scratch as native apps (a risky decision with an IPO around the corner.) - Created a recruiting program to identify mobile engineering talent, and hired aggressively across the company. - Offered mobile-skills training programs for hundreds of engineers. - Required new mobile releases every 4-8 weeks. - Encouraged employees to trade in iPhones for Android devices to better represent what the majority of Facebook mobile users have. - Acquired Instagram for $1 billion (another risky decision before an IPO). - Repeatedly asks employees, “What’s that look like on mobile?”
Facebook soon went from “mobile first” to what Zuckerberg now calls “mobile best,” and the results speak for themselves. Mobile is not an addition, but a transformation driven by action in the face of risk and uncertainty. “You have to change the tasks at the very core” supported by resources to change an organization’s culture, explains David Skok, who co-authored a report with Harvard’s Clayton Christensen on media disruption.
Facebook is more than just a mobile case study; it should be a wake-up call for media companies and news organizations. Facebook’s mobile presence is greater than every media company’s mobile footprint combined. Zuckerberg says his goal is to make it the best personalized newspaper on the planet, and with 819 million mobile monthly active users and 1 million advertisers, he’s off to a good start.
“Journalists have to get more creative and entrepreneurial. And I think that’s the problem. There’s not a less risk-taking crowd than a bunch of journalists who like to tell everyone how to run their businesses and then, like, couldn’t run a business to save their life.”—A pull-no-punches quote from journalist entrepreneur Kara Swisher in this story, and I agree wholeheartedly. Lest anyone forget, being an entrepreneur is about the business.
“I would expect desktop to plateau a little longer before immediately declining.”— Wade Rifkin, VP at Digitas New York, talking about the inevitable shift in advertising spending from the desktop to mobile. Adds Digitas VP Alex Jacobs, “Digital spend will continue to rise and mobile will increasingly take a larger piece of that pie. But it is not a zero sum game. Is spending on desktop on the road to reaching a plateau? Probably. Is the prediction that it will be flat as soon as 2014 aggressive? Yes.”
However, the more immediate effects will be felt as the audience shifts more time away from desktop to mobile. While some mobile consumption is incremental, much of it is substitutional. As desktop inventory plateaus, new mobile inventory — selling at a lower CPM — won’t immediately compensate for the decline in revenue growth.
What really is the 'most important measure' of a journalist's work?
The most important measure of a journalist’s work is impact, right? Isn’t that’s why we became journalists in the first place? It certainly wasn’t for the money.
But this new survey discovered that journalists believe unique users is the overwhelming measure of success. Page views, social followers and sharing followed as other important metrics.
Sure, we can’t measure impact. At least yet. That’s why we fall back on the longstanding media metrics of reach and frequency, which drive our business. But if we’re truly making a difference — and we can take credit for it — then wouldn’t reach and frequency follow? Couldn’t impact metrics extend to native advertising, too?
Let’s work on this as an industry. In order to measure impact, we have to make it. Let’s enable our audience to take action from our stories and gather data around it. Mobile is a unique opportunity to make this happen. Let’s stop guessing if we make a difference.
PS. Congrats to ImpactStory for landing a $250K grant from the Sloan Foundation. We need more efforts like these.
“Every time you encounter another person, think: help this person. By thinking [this way], you will change the ways that others perceive you. There is no faster or more effective way to change your interactions and relationships.”— Entrepreneur and author Bruce Kasanoff in this LinkedIn article.
“Google X is very consciously looking at things that Google in its right mind wouldn’t do…. They built the rocket pad far away from the widget factory, so if the rocket blows up, it’s hopefully not disrupting the core business.”—Google X’s Richard DeVaul in a great write-up by Business Week.
“Beautiful and ‘well designed’ are not synonymous. Too many app designers are tasked only with making beautiful veneers. They’re really decorators, not designers. Building a great product requires consistency—between goals, product mechanics, interface, and aesthetics.”— Bobby Goodlatte, writing in Medium about app design.
“'Antifragile' is that category of things that not only gain from chaos but need it in order to survive and flourish.”— From the book Antifragile, which certainly applies to the uncertain media and technology space we’re living in today.
When I first heard of the video app Vine, I wondered what would’ve happened if someone who worked at a media company had pitched the same idea internally. After all, it only records six seconds of video?
Even outside a media company, the idea wasn’t embraced by everyone. “What a stupid idea,” thought entrepreneur Dustin Curtis when he saw an early glimpse of Vine last year. “I couldn’t see it ever succeeding.” Vine is currently ranked as the #1 social networking app on iTunes.
Curtis said he also saw a prototype of an “app for browsing catalogs,” which he also deemed as a stupid idea. That one became Pinterest.
“For some reason, my first reaction to their earliest attempts wasn’t to give them the benefit of the doubt – it was to immediately find problems and then dismiss their ideas,” Curtis explains in a wonderfully honest blog post.
For people who work at media companies, does that sound familiar? I don’t even want to fathom how many breakthrough ideas have been shot down in newsroom meetings, brainstorm sessions and executive boardrooms. I’m sure I’m responsible for shooting down a few myself, confusing my experience doing things the old way as a magical ability to predict the future.
“I have found that return and ridicule are highly correlated over the years,” writes VC Fred Wilson. “We have made more money on things that were highly ridiculed than on any other cohort. When I see people laughing at ideas and companies we have backed, I smile. It means we are going to make a lot of money on that investment.”
These crazy ideas tend to be the most disruptive, as we’ve read in Clayton Christensen’s Innovator’s Dilemma. “The next big thing always starts out being dismissed as a toy,” explains entrepreneur and investor Chris Dixon, referring to Christensen’s theory. Executives who hear a pitch for a new idea react instinctively from their view of the business: the more disruptive the idea, the harsher the reaction.
“There still is a blind and bold arrogance,” said a recently-departed newspaper ad executive writing anonymously in Digiday. “By their very own design, [newspapers] are built for an extremely top-down decision-making process and [are] tremendously inefficient for today’s marketplace from all facets.”
Not just inefficient, but it’s how media companies inadvertently kill great ideas. We must keep our arrogance in check, suppress our experience and listen openly to crazy-sounding ideas. And not only that, but empower others in the organization to act on new ideas with the most minimum of approvals. Let’s reduce the friction and turn “stupid ideas” into prototypes and the best into new businesses.
Lots of people follow @breakingnews on Twitter — the account and the breakingnews.com website and mobile apps have become indispensable resources for news junkies who need to stay up-to-the-minute on the biggest news of the moment.
We all know mobile is growing at an unprecedented rate, but most news organizations are struggling to measure it. For many newsrooms, that data is buried in desktop-centric analytics services, not tagged appropriately (if at all) or owned by third-party providers. The end result is a mobile blind spot, making it difficult react to new demands and opportunities in a critical time in the business.
Even worse, however, is when the data is misleading. For example, Buzzfeed recently reported that its network has experienced a precipitous drop in search referrals. However, as both SearchEngineLand and Digiday explain, the effect is largely due to something called “Dark Google” — an increasing number of searches are private, which appear as direct traffic. The two biggest sources of private searches: iOS 6 devices and some versions of Firefox.
"This misappropriation of traffic is already an issue, and it’s only going to get worse as people upgrade browsers and switch away from desktop to mobile search on iOS devices," said Stephen Pitts, SEO director at Rosetta in the Digiday story. “Already a lot of search traffic is being misappropriated as direct.”
So it’s not that search is in decline, but it’s shifting to mobile.
Apps are another source of dark data. Most analytics services do not measure app referrals, counting them as direct or unknown. There are a couple key exceptions: both Facebook and Twitter use their own intermediate URLs — m.facebook.com and t.co — to ensure their app referrals appear. But many other apps do not, further inflating the direct number.
There’s also confusion around the difference between apps and the mobile web. The Guardian recently posted a story quoting a Nielsen report that Facebook was suffering a decline in visits. But the Nielsen report measured the web only — desktop and mobile — but not mobile apps. When you fold the mobile apps number into the mobile web, the overall mobile growth more than outpaces the desktop decline. In fact, Facebook just reported it has 189 million users who only log in via mobile devices.
Again, not a decline, but a shift to mobile.
For the news industry, these misconceptions are dangerous. Journalists are already underestimating the wholesale shift to mobile — especially apps, which make up 80% of time spent on mobile. By not knowing the true data — or ignoring the data that matters — newsrooms are out of position to capitalize on one of the greatest consumer shifts in modern history.
What to do? First, ensure you’re measuring how users consume content on both the mobile web and mobile apps. Look at the numbers that matter: monthly and daily active users (MAUs and DAUs), for example, are much better success metrics than downloads. Also, examine how consumption patterns differ by device, dayparts and web vs. apps. Then hold newsroom-wide training sessions that show journalists how to access this data, explaining the difference between metrics. Finally, emphasize the importance of mobile metrics over the desktop, drawing a link between mobile success and your digital future.
By now, you’ve probably read, watched or heard content relating to how several media entities reported false information for days after the Boston Marathon bombings. Seattle-based Breaking News, however, did what some failed to do: They reported only facts.
Why journalists are now responsible for the business
Earlier this week, a thread on Branch asked journalists what they’d like to see at this year’s Online News Association’s conference, the biggest annual meeting of digital journalists. Many of the responses focused on making things, which is a refreshing new addition for an industry that traditionally just focused on telling stories. But very few of the responses mentioned business innovation and user data, even as the industry’s survival hinges on it.
No more blaming the business side for our industry’s failures. Journalists are now responsible for revenue, too. Let me explain.
In the very near future, most news will be consumed on mobile. Most purchasing decisions will be made via mobile, too. As I recently wrote on Poynter, mobile will disrupt journalism like the Internet did a decade ago.
It all hinges on data. The more you know about a user — her history, physical location, likes, search terms, etc. — the better you can personalize her mobile experience and target meaningful advertising. Facebook is arguably a much better news experience than any news app — “We want to give everyone in the world the best personalized newspaper in the world,” Zuckerberg said last month — and perhaps that’s why people spend 11X more time on Facebook’s app than all news apps combined. On the advertising side, all that data adds up to ad targeting that news organizations can’t match.
“The key factor for Facebook here is to capture as much data as possible on Facebook users’ mobile habits,” writes Ewan Spence in Forbes. “That’s why Facebook is involved in mobile, and that’s why they need to keep pace with the ecosystems [Google and Apple] that are capturing all that mobile data.”
So it’s not about simply extending our news experiences into mobile, but leveraging mobile to capture data that we can use to make better user experiences and compete for advertising dollars. The challenge is convincing users to give you their data. And that’s where journalists, who increasingly are the same people who make things at news organizations, come into the picture.
We have to make mobile products that get better with data. Products that solve a problem in such an obvious way, users are willing to tell us about themselves. This is not a responsive design or “just another news app.” With the exception of a small handful of news organizations, paywalls are just a partial patch: they generate data, but barely influence the experience and don’t come close to enabling mobile ad targeting widely available on Google, Facebook and Twitter.
If I may suggest, the next time journalists get together at a big event, let’s throw out the stuff we always talk about and focus on the pressing business and product challenges of mobile and data. It may not be popular, but it’s our survival.
“I’ve believed now for a while — we should stop looking at competition. We should stop worrying about The New York Times or The Guardian or the FT or Bloomburg or Reuters, because in this day and age audiences can be very, very promiscuous because of technology. What I’m really competing for, at the end of the day, is the one single non-renewable thing my readers have, which is their time. So if I can grab 5, 10, 15 more minutes of it, I think I can win this battle and not worry about where they might have spent that time.”—WSJ’s Raju Narisetti, one of the smartest guys in the digital news space.
If your readers are shifting to phones and tablets, so should you. As a journalist, I’d always start my day with a computer on my lap. My default state was content creation, not consumption. But a few months ago, I forced myself to shift to a mobile consumption mindset in the morning, reaching for my phone instead. At night, I gravitate toward a tablet.
I read and answer email, catch up on industry news, fire off a few tweets and occasionally buy something, too. It’s deeply educational. A few experiences are great, most are not. I often find myself waiting, pinching, swiping my way around, instead of getting what I want and getting things done. The only way to really understand the frustration — and by extension the opportunity — is to experience it yourself.
"Pay particular attention to things that chafe you," explains startup guru Paul Graham on his blog. “The way to get startup ideas is not to try to think of startup ideas. It’s to look for problems, preferably problems you have yourself.”
2. Become a student of the mobile space
While you’re discovering really bad mobile experiences — and hopefully beginning to think how to make them better — you should also explore the leading-edge of new mobile products and the trends that drive them.
Here are some recommendations for publications and social resources to keep abreast of the mobile product world, especially in context of news and information:
Techmeme is always a great overview with a growing mobile presence. Ignore all the techy device news (even I’m confused by all the different devices and operating systems) and look for mobile trends, new products and big partnerships.
The Mobile Journalism group on Facebook, started by Will Sullivan. (Apply to join only if you work in the news business).
If you see anything else I should add, just ping me on Twitter (@corybe).
3. Play with promising new mobile products
As you read about the mobile space — and occasionally check the top charts on Apple and Google’s app stores — you’ll discover new mobile experiences to try. Don’t just limit yourself to news, but keep an eye out for promising utilities, social networks and even information gaming, too.
Give these new products an honest try. See if they naturally become part of your routine. Do they solve any of your frustrations? Do they make something easier, more efficient, more fun? Why or why not?
Over time, you’ll begin to see if your own predictions match up with the rest of the market (i.e. chart positions and ratings). You’ll start to build some product intuition that will help you identify and pursue your own mobile ideas.
4. Start looking at the data
Once you become more astute as a mobile-first consumer, you should begin to wonder how people are using (or not using) your newsroom’s mobile experiences.
Ask your analytics guru for insight (or better yet, access). How do people interact inside your mobile experiences? Phone vs. tablet? Web vs. app? What types of stories are most popular? Does that vary with time of day? By device? What do users share the most? Do they read articles or bail out after a quick scroll? Etc.
Unlike the desktop, mobile is driven by context. People look for different kinds of information — and consume it differently — depending on what they’re doing and where they are. Often times, we lack this data, but we shouldn’t take our eyes off the user.
As outgoing Groupon CEO Andrew Mason explained, “My biggest regrets are the moments that I let a lack of data override my intuition on what’s best for our customers.”
When you start learning these habits — and build up your intuition — you can better tailor your own coverage to fulfill user needs. Share your findings with the newsroom, and encourage others to provide their feedback and insights.
When I wondered openly about how to get journalists excited about mobile media, AP’s Ted Anthony tweeted to me, “Make it about people, not platforms.” I couldn’t agree more.
We have a long ways to go, but this is a good starting point.
(Full disclosure: I’m GM of Breaking News, a mobile-first startup owned by NBC News. Keep an eye on our @breaking Twitter account for upcoming news on how we’re approaching mobile.)
“We talk about ‘mobile first’ in 2012, but we want to be ‘mobile best’ in 2013. We want to create some mobile experiences that simply can’t be done on the desktop.”— Facebook VP Dan Rose speaking at All Things D’s conference.
Why Facebook's stunning mobile numbers should get news organizations' attention
(Updated) Facebook is now a mobile company, not just in culture, but in audience. During its Q4 earnings announcement, Facebook said its mobile active users surpassed the desktop for the first time in its history — 680 million users (+57% YOY) out of 1.06 billion overall.
But perhaps the most surprising data point is the skyrocketing number of mobile-only users. “In only a year, just under 100 million more people starting using Facebook only on mobile, never touching desktop,” explained The Verge reporter Tim Carmody.
This should startle journalists for a couple reasons.
First, Facebook’s mobile footprint eclipses every news organization on the planet, and a huge population of users are growing accustomed to consuming mobile news on Facebook. It accounts for 23% of all time spent with mobile apps, according to Comscore in December. That beats every news organization’s app combined by a long shot. A study by Flurry in November found that the news category only accounts for 2% of total time spent on apps. Social apps accounted for 26%.
Twitter is also forming mobile habits around real-time news consumption, and the sky is the limit if it can solve the discovery problem. By creating platforms tailored to mobile — not just extended to mobile — these social giants are grabbing a huge share of attention, limiting the mobile opportunity for news organizations. And as we learned from the shift from newspapers to the Internet, catching up is very difficult.
Second, Facebook’s numbers hint that there’s a shift among a growing audience from desktop-centric behavior to mobile first. By extension, desktop consumption will decline. Google is already seeing it: four straight months of a decline in desktop search (Google expects mobile traffic to surpass desktop later this year.). While both Google and Facebook are monetizing this mobile shift — they dominate a large majority of all mobile ad dollars spent — news organizations are not.
At least yet. And simply shifting display ads to mobile is not the answer.
I watched the live stream of the Media Impact Forum today — an event held at Stanford — which highlighted how innovative companies are measuring the “social impact" of their work. I couldn’t help but think about how the same approach could be adapted to journalism.
"You put [the story] out there, but does anyone care?" asked Neal Baer, best known for his role as producer and writer of ER. A doctor himself, Baer integrated valuable medical information in the show. But he asked, "How do you go from inspiration to action?" How do you know that it actually made a difference?
Baer has been thinking about this since his ER days when he participated in a groundbreaking study (.pdf) that measured whether ER viewers took action after watching a show. In fact, one in seven regular ER viewers contacted a medical professional about something they saw on the show. That’s an incredible impact for a TV drama.
Journalists intuitively know that their best stories make a difference. NYT’s David Bornstein, who founded the “Solutions Journalism Network,” says he often asks journalists what story they’re most proud of. “And almost always it was a story they wrote that had a positive social impact,” he explained at the Media Impact Forum.
But social impact is difficult to measure and often anecdotal in nature. If we were able to measure a story’s impact in real numbers, we’d redefine engagement from questionable metrics like time spent and social sharing to something much more concrete: action. Then we’d be able to optimize stories around impact, covering and showcasing stories that make the biggest difference in our communities.
Perhaps the same model could be applied to native advertising, too.
So, how would we measure something like this? We’re starting to see some amazing innovation in the startup space. For example, NexLeaf.org uses mobile phones as networked measurement devices, crunching real-time data to draw scientific conclusions on the impact of non-profit projects. Neighborland encourages neighbors to take on community causes, gain support and take action — which Neighborland tracks on a list of accomplishments. VolunteerMatch has calculated its “social value” by determining how much money non-profits save by using the service to find volunteers (over $600 million a year.) And ImpactStory provides a way for companies to showcase their impact metrics in real time.
There still isn’t a trusted set of “impact metrics” for journalism, but as I’ve written before, I believe newsrooms must help create that connection by including action paths from current storytelling. If we enable consumers to take action directly from stories — when they care the most — then we’re increasingly able to measure a given story’s impact.
Such a connection often frightens journalists who feel that adding points of action to a story feels like advocacy. But MIT Civic Media Lab’s Ethan Zuckerman calls such a defense an “allusion of objectivity,” arguing that news organizations have a social responsibility to help citizens become active participants. If we take change seriously, “we need to accept that participatory media is more than participating in making media,” he said at a recent conference. “Could we find ways to get people excited that they wouldn’t just get informed but join a movement and take action?”
I couldn’t agree more, and I believe there are ways to provide measurable paths of action that protect objectivity. Together with mobile, it’s nothing less than the next frontier of journalism.
Why mobile will disrupt journalism like the Internet did a decade ago
I’ve been on my mobile soapbox lately, urging news organizations to adopt a “mobile first” mindset. Meanwhile, Business Insider’s Henry Blodget says the smarter strategy is “mobile, too.”
“The reality is that we live in a multi-screen world, not a ‘mobile world’ that operates parallel to a ‘desktop world,’” he writes. “For some services, such as news and information, the laptop/desktop screen is still by far the most dominant screen. So abandoning that screen, or designing for another screen first, just doesn’t make sense.”
Blodget’s view is matched by many in the journalism industry, but it misses the larger point. This isn’t about design and distribution as much as it is about disruption.
Rewind to 1996 when newspapers enjoyed fat profit margins, and two startups made their debut on the early Internet. One company all but destroyed newspapers’ biggest revenue driver, and the other ended up generating more advertising revenue — most of it local — than the entire newspaper business combined.
Both Craigslist and Google created new business models enabled by the technology and scale of the Internet. In the same way, mobile is enabling new business models and use cases. Just like the mid to late 1990s, we’re at the leading edge of the ensuing disruption.
Two big drivers of mobile disruption are geolocation and digital payments. Taken together, they have the capability to disrupt local advertising all over again. The right technology with the right execution will be able to drive nearby consumers into local businesses and anonymously track their actual purchases at scale, closing the loop like never before. No more guessing about ad effectiveness. For local media organizations, that has the potential to destroy your business.
According to eMarketer, Google ended last year with a 56% share of ALL mobile advertising dollars in the US. Earlier in the year, it announced it was taking a “mobile first” approach to product development. Last summer Facebook also revealed a shift to a mobile first strategy. When Marissa Mayer took over the reins at Yahoo, she proclaimed the same thing, gobbling up mobile startups to expedite innovation.
Meanwhile, there’s a new onslaught of “mobile first” and “mobile only” startups spanning communication, news, advertising and services. One of the most notable, Square, is well on its way to reinventing how businesses accept payments. It’s now valued at $3.25 billion.
I don’t know about you, but a “mobile, too” approach worries me when the technology world is investing so deeply in mobile first innovation. Despite experiments with paid content, advertising remains the core source of revenue for journalism — and mobile ad rates are a fraction of the desktop. Media companies are barely a blip on that eMarketer mobile advertising chart.
This isn’t just a threat to ad dollars, but attention, too. Facebook’s mobile footprint is mind-boggling, and Twitter (which began as a mobile company) is making great strides, as well. Just those two organizations alone have changed the landscape of mobile news and information.
Is all this sounding familiar?
This means two things for news organizations. First, now is the time to invest like never before. There’s a narrow window of opportunity to invent — or invest and acquire — disruptive mobile technologies and business models that could eventually sustain, grow or even multiply your revenue. Whatever your company has done in the past, triple it.
Second, a “mobile first” mindset should be adopted organization wide. This doesn’t mean you ignore the desktop, but you prioritize mobile over it — you make mobile the default everything — from setting performance goals to creating new products. Cultural shifts don’t happen overnight, and the clock is ticking. Soon mobile will become the primary way people get their news, and desktop consumption will inevitably drop over time.
“In the next 12–18 months, many news organizations will cross the 50 percent threshold where more users are visiting on phones and tablets than on desktop computers and laptops,” explains Fiona Spruill, editor of emerging platforms at The New York Times. “The numbers speak for themselves.”
At Google, it’s already happening. Desktop searches are now in a steady decline, and the company expects mobile searches will surpass desktop this year.
Imagine being able to rewind to the 1990s and help your news organization make key strategic decisions — and create new habits — that would have helped the business thrive on the Internet. That’s the opportunity we have today with mobile.
Twitter revealed this week that it uses Mechanical Turk — a crowdsourced pool of people — as an innovative way to help identify and classify search queries as soon as they’re trending. For example, the Mechanical Turks could associate the phrase “Big Bird” with a Presidential debate….