,
13 tweets,
5 min read
Read on Twitter
I'm fascinated that an Instagram-only news company has received funding at all (let alone from The Guardian), especially because Instagram is a notoriously difficult platform for publishers to monetise - and lack of revenue is why we're *losing* so many journo jobs. Thread 👇
Right now #ThisMuchIKnow is just an Instagram account, no website. They're calling themselves a news company but the account can't seem to decide if it's another screenshot meme account or information service - it's swaying from basic bitch to brexit. 
The images and captions shared aren't particularly informative or well-produced, and the majority aren't credited to the source. Really surprising and poor practice for a news company, and from a previous Vogue editor.
So the account needs a clean-up and audit before launch as a news site. Let's say they do it - how do you run a news company on Instagram? The platform is v hard to monetise - publishers usually rely on Stories or links in bio to drive site traffic (= ad traffic) for any revenue.
But #ThisMuchIKnow doesn't have a website and seems unlikely they will, as they're lauded as Instagram-only. So site traffic revenue is out. Let's consider sponsored content - will that impact impartiality? Even if not, alone it probably won't contribute enough to run a company.
You can't organically monetise Instagram feed posts, Stories or IGTV - yet. I've been at several meetings and workshops with Instagram where it's been asked *when* will publishers be able to monetise on the platform. I've heard "it's something we're open to" etc but nothing more.
So if there's a news site being set up specifically for Instagram, perhaps they know something about the platform and its development that we don't - e.g. are more monetisation features for publishers coming?
Or, they're naive and lack an understanding of how the platform works.
Or, they're naive and lack an understanding of how the platform works.
"This is not a job for people who like a safe d̶e̶s̶k̶ job".
This headless chicken approach to hiring is astounding. I translate the whole quote as "We have no idea what we're doing or how we'll do it but we've been given a load of cash so we better figure it out and quick".
This headless chicken approach to hiring is astounding. I translate the whole quote as "We have no idea what we're doing or how we'll do it but we've been given a load of cash so we better figure it out and quick".
This is good: "We ask questions of our audience all the time. This is a job that will require relentless curiosity"
The last question #ThisMuchIKnow posted on their Instagram account was this.
Relentless curiosity indeed.
The last question #ThisMuchIKnow posted on their Instagram account was this.
Relentless curiosity indeed.
The whole quote just further perpetuates an industry in trouble - paddling desperately below the surface to stay afloat. Let's just say it hardly inspires me to fire up LinkedIn.
ANYWAY, the notion of a social-only news company IS exciting - InTheKnow and NowThis do it well for video so why not translate to news? But without understanding and correct execution social media will look like a joke or afterthought rather than a genuine business opportunity.
I really, really hope there's more to this investment and enterprise than meets the eye. Right now it looks like a £42m fund has ploughed their trust (and cash) into a mum's Instagram account in the name of saving journalism.
Just because social media is accessible to almost everyone, it doesn't mean it's easy. YES to this area of investment, OH NO to who's received it. Let's see how this pans out 🤷♀️
