Below are 10 takeaways from the three phases of data collection on platforms and publishers:
以下是從平台和出版商3階段的數據蒐集中，歸納出的10個重點：
1.Election week saw a big increase in platform activity
社交平台在大選週變得活躍
Our third period of data collection began on Monday, November 7, and coincided with the week of the US election. It came as no surprise that we saw significant spikes in publishers’ activity across platforms, compared to the two previous phases of our analysis.
第3個數據收集週期從11月7日星期一開始，也就是美國的大選週。 毫無疑問，與之前的兩個階段相比，我們發現出版商「跨平台」的發布行為有顯著的增長。
2. Publishers aren’t cooling on Instant Articles. But they’re not going all in, either.
出版商對Instant Articles（臉書即時新聞服務）的態度仍有待觀察
Instant Articles is a format developed by Facebook that allows publishers to post articles natively to the platform. When a publisher posts one of its articles as an Instant Article on Facebook, the mobile reader is directed to a fast-loading page stored on Facebook’s own servers. The downside for publishers is the article does not generate traffic back to the publisher’s own site, resulting in a loss of control over audience data, fewer opportunities to entice users to engage with further content, an increased reliance on Facebook’s ecosystem, and the inability to shield content behind a paywall.
臉書開發的Instant Articles，允許出版商將原生的內容發佈到平台上，當出版商在臉書發佈即時新聞時，行動裝置的讀者會被導向至臉書伺服器的快速加載頁面。對出版商不利的是，自有網站的流量無法增加，導致失去對用戶數據的掌握，無法誘使用戶接觸更多的內容。用戶對臉書的依賴增加了，但無法將「付費牆」置於內容之前。
Looking at how much publishers have embraced Instant Articles is a barometer for their attitude toward hosting content on Facebook. Posting an Instant Article represents a clear choice by the publisher: to cede control over advertising and appearance to Facebook.
出版商選擇Instant Articles做為發佈模式，等同將廣告和內容介面的控制權交給了臉書。
In September, Digiday reported that some publishers appeared to be “cooling” on Instant Articles. Findings from the first six months of our study do not support this. The picture is rather more nuanced. While some have reined in their use of Instant Articles (CNN), others have increased it (The Huffington Post). While some have remained pretty consistent, others have fluctuated (The New York Times). Our snapshots can’t speak for the publishers’ overall strategy, which may change week to week. But it is clear that there is no mass rejection of Facebook’s native publishing format.
9月時，根據Digiday報告指出，一些出版商似乎對臉書Instant Articles不怎麼感興趣，但這不符合我們前6個月的研究發現；雖然有些出版商（CNN）早已開始使用，其他出版商也增加使用頻率（The Huffington Post），某些出版商則維持一致，也有出版商仍處在觀望（紐約時報）。 因為每週都還會有變化，我們初步的結果無法解釋目前出版商的整體策略，但至少說明了臉書的出版格式並沒有被大規模拒絕。
The major players:
˙Vox (96%), BuzzFeed News (93%), BuzzFeed (84%), Fox News (83%), The Washington Post (82%), and The Huffington Post (both 82%) have fully embraced Instant. (The Washington Post is no surprise; it decided to go all in on Instant Articles as early as September 2015.)
˙The New York Daily News (4%) and The Wall Street Journal (3%) post a tiny proportion of their links as Instant Articles.
˙Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, and Vice News are not using Instant articles.
˙The New York Times (49%) and CNN (28%) are striking a middle ground.
主要出版商使用情況：
˙像Vox（96％），BuzzFeed News（93％），BuzzFeed（84％），福斯新聞（83％），華盛頓郵報（82％）和The Huffington Post 都已採用Instant Articles（華盛頓郵報在2015年9月時就已決定就採用）。
˙紐約日報（4％）和華爾街日報（3％）則較少使用。
˙芝加哥論壇報、洛杉磯時報和Vice News完全沒有使用。
˙紐約時報（49％）和CNN（28％）則在中間值。
3. On Instant, Vice News stands out from other digital natives
Vice News決定走自己的路
One might expect digital native Vice News—one arm of a company whose “name has become code for all things millennial”—to post content natively on Facebook like other digital natives such as Vox and BuzzFeed News. But Vice News has outright rejected Instant Articles, posting exactly zero of its articles via Instant. This positions Vice’s strategy alongside the Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times—the latter being both tronc-owned, subscription-based regional newspapers.
另一個備受期待並深獲年青族群喜愛的數位原生媒體Vice News，和 Vox、BuzzFeed News都直接在臉書發佈原生內容，但Vice News徹底拒絕了臉書Instant Articles，其發布量還是零。芝加哥論壇報和洛杉磯時報這兩家以會員訂閱制為主的區域型出版商也是。
———————————
作者：Pete Brown
編譯：朱弘川
原文網址： http://www.cjr.org/tow_center/platforms-and-publishers-no-sign-of-retreat.php
