UCLA NSIDP – Neuroscience

UCLA Celebrates Brain Awareness Week

UCLA hosts an annual Brain Awareness Week in recognition of the global campaign to increase public awareness of neuroscience and the progress of brain research. The event is organized by a current NSIDP graduate student, who coordinates Project Brainstorm, an outreach group within the Brain Research Institute that makes weekly visits to low-income, low-opportunity K-12 schools all over Los Angeles to teach students about neuroscience.

This year for Brain Awareness Week, 250 5th to 12th graders visited UCLA, where they enjoyed interactive activities hosted by UCLA neuroscience undergraduate and graduate students! Participants explored fundamental neuroscience concepts, such as the different lobes of the brain, synaptic transmission and brain injury, observed sheep brain dissections to learn about parts of the brain as well as brain evolution, and learned popular neuroscience topics, such as the phantom limb syndrome, reflexes versus reaction times, the stroop effect and more! Students also visited different UCLA neuroscience laboratories, interacted with current scientists, and learned about the research process and the principles of various areas of ongoing research.

Brain Awareness Week 2016 could not have been possible without the efforts of previous coordinators, graduate students from neuroscience and other departments, undergraduates from Project Brainstorm, and members from Psych in Action, Interaxon and Project Synapse. The event has received much positive feedback from both the evaluations students filled out at the end of each day as well as verbal comments. Schools have even begun inquiring about participating in next years Brain Awareness Week!

For more information: http://neuroscience.ucla.edu/outreach

Link:
UCLA NSIDP - Neuroscience

Neuroscience Concentration Graduate Program in Biomedical …

Neuroscience Concentration Description

All students enrolled in the Neuroscience program will work towards obtaining a Ph.D. degree through the College of Medicine. Every student in the Neuroscience concentration is required to have at least one published or in press peer-reviewed, original research article pertaining directly to the students dissertation prior to graduating. Each student must have at least one member on his/her dissertation committee who holds a primary appointment in the Department of Neuroscience.

The Neuroscience curriculum is designed to complement the research interests of our graduate students. After completing the courses required in the fall semester of the first year, each student must complete a total of 12 credits of advanced graduate course work. All students enrolled in the Neuroscience concentration are required to take and successfully complete at least two of the courses in List A (below) or they may choose to take all of them. Successful completion means obtaining a 3.0 grade point average. Most students enrolled in the program complete their advanced course work by the end of the second year.

The Neuroscience concentration offers five (5) advanced courses annually (see List A) and additional elective courses annually or biennially. Students may also select their elective advanced courses from those offered by other doctoral programs. In some cases, students may choose to take courses offered by programs outside of the College of Medicine. Each students selection of courses must be approved by the students advisory/dissertation committee and the Neuroscience Graduate Program Directors.

Finally, each student is required to participate in the Neuroscience Graduate Research Seminars (GMS 6792), the Neuroscience Department Seminars (GMS 7794), and one journal club each Fall and Spring semester starting in their second year. The topics of the journal clubs are tailored to the specific educational needs of our students and vary each semester.

For a list of faculty members in the Neuroscience advanced program, please click here. Faculty names link to faculty web pages.

Read more from the original source:
Neuroscience Concentration Graduate Program in Biomedical ...

What Insights Lie at the Intersection of Neuroscience and Marketing? – Knowledge@Wharton

Research into the interplay between the discipline of neuroscience which studies the brain and the nervous system and marketing could help to explain how people make decisions, how they react to stimuli and what triggers might amplify or diminish the impulses that drive social interactions or even innovation in a business setting. Such research also raises ethical questions on how those insights might be used, and how to prevent them from getting into the wrong hands.

Those are the opportunities and challenges for the Wharton Neuroscience Initiative, which was launched in September 2016, according to Michael Platt, its director. Platt, a neuroscientist, is also a Penn Integrates Knowledge professor with appointments at the University of Pennsylvanias Perelman School of Medicine, the department of psychology in the School of Arts and Sciences, and the marketing department at Wharton. Creating the neuroscience initiative at the intersection of medicine and business is a provocative idea, said Platt. But he is convinced that it sends a clear signal to business schools, universities and people in industry that neuroscience is here, and the future of business is in neuroscience.

Technological developments in the space also make it an opportune time for such an initiative, according to Elizabeth (Zab) Johnson, who is managing director and senior fellow of the Wharton Neuroscience Initiative. She pointed to the huge boom in wearable neurotech, and the proliferation of devices such as heartbeat monitoring watches, sleep monitoring gadgets and brainwave headbands. [Students] need to know how to tell hype from whats practical, she said. We need them to be savvy about that. Platt and Johnson were previously colleagues at Duke Universitys Institute for Brain Sciences.

Platt and Johnson discussed the intersection of neuroscience and business on the Marketing Matters show on Wharton Business Radio on SiriusXM channel 111. (Listen to the podcast at the top of this page.)

How We Tick, Why We Tick

Businesses and marketers need to get up to speed on the use of neuroscience in advertising and marketing, according to Catharine Hays, executive director of the Wharton Future of Advertising program, who co-hosts the Marketing Matters show. The essence of the initiative is grounded in helping people, understanding how we tick, why we tick, and then using that information to make sure that we tick well, she said. It helps that Penn has a large neuroscience community, she noted.

Platt expanded on Hayss comments and said, Knowing something more about how we tick as individuals and how we tick together sometimes and sometimes we dont could impact the way we do business and educate the next generation of students.

According to Platt, the tremendous strides in neuroscience over the last couple of decades will help people with brain disorders like Alzheimers disease. Those same advances in neuroscience will also help businesses and individuals reach their maximum potential to create value for society, he added.

The Wharton Neuroscience Initiative this year started an Introduction to Brain Science for Business course. It essentially uses business as a vehicle to teach students neuroscience, and also a means to convey some of the emerging areas for applications, said Platt. Some of those are in the area of marketing, to test the effectiveness of advertising such as engaging people and predicting sales, he explained. The idea is to broaden the domain of neuroscience beyond attention or decision-making to social neuroscience or studies of creativity, he added.

The brain is trying to figure out ambiguity, and is trying to find solutions for what we see and what we perceive. Elizabeth (Zab) Johnson

Takeaways for Businesses

Research being conducted by Platt and Johnson could find numerous applications in the world of business. Johnsons research includes studies in vision and color vision. For example, she would examine why different people identify the same color differently, such as some seeing blue as black or white as gold. She pointed to applications, for example, in the cosmetics industry. We spend a lot of time looking at whether or not we can make ourselves more attractive by adding different colors, she said.

Johnson saw big opportunities for research into those varying perceptions of color. People had very emotional responses when they realized that what their friends saw was different from what they saw, even though it is same [color], she said. The neuro-scientific explanation for people seeing colors differently is still being probed, she added.

Inherently what you perceive is all in your head, which as neuroscientists we always knew, Johnson said. We also know that the brain is trying to figure out ambiguity, and is trying to find solutions for what we see and what we perceive. She has also begun to research how colors on peoples faces change depending on their emotional state and the signals that we might be getting but we dont think about, such as when people blush.

Hays noted that 80% of the decisions or choices people make are based in their subconscious. [In] bringing them to the fore and making them explicit, the business applications are mind boggling, she said.

Platt said his research includes trying to understand at a very deep level aspects of interpersonal interactions. That begins with how people perceive each other to higher-order processes such as how that might prompt people to be kind or deceptive, he explained.

We are working out the circuitry [and] trying to understand how we might turn up the volume on some of those signals and turn down the volume on some others, Platt said. So, could you do various kinds of nudges to promote more social behavior, to make us more attentive to each other, or [to become] better able to read social cues and be better listeners?

Could you do various kinds of nudges to promote more social behavior, to make us more attentive to each other, or [to become] better able to read social cues and be better listeners? Michael Platt

A Measured, Cautious Approach

Penn research is focused on using those insights to test new therapies to treat people with disorders, including both medicines and non-invasive brain stimulation, Platt explained. We need to do research to figure out how to do it right, and how to do it safely. Some of those therapies are being put into practice at the Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia, he added.

Platts research extends to studying decision-making and how people weigh trade-offs between continuing to exploit something they know well versus taking risks to explore new ways of doing things. That is where the spark of innovation comes from, he added. As that research advances, it will also try to uncover the mechanisms of that process, measure it on individuals unobtrusively through a wearable device or stimulate that circuitry on people whose job it is to be innovative. The research work will also extend to innovating on devices at an ideas lab to improve quality and make them cheaper so they can be used more in everyday lives.

Platt acknowledged that such research raises important ethical questions, but clarified that they are not specific to neuroscience in a business context. He said that among other resources to grapple with those issues, he wants to tap into the deep expertise in bioethics at Penn. Johnson called for continuing debate on these issues to come up with the right applications.

See the original post:
What Insights Lie at the Intersection of Neuroscience and Marketing? - Knowledge@Wharton

Neuroscience and security: your thoughts are safe (for now) – We Live Security (blog)

Could an attacker guess your PIN number or your email password by reading your brain?

A Canadian researcher called Melanie Segado explained to us the extent to which your brain activity could be used for malicious purposes, to find out, for example, what youre thinking or to guess your PIN.

Melanie, who is finishing her doctorate in neuroscience in Montreal and is co-founder of the NeurotechX community, differentiated the techniques that are used for measuring brain activity, which allows for the interpretation of the signals that emitted due to stimuli.

She and other researchers in the field are trying to determine the capabilities and limitations of this technology in the context of security.

Firstly, there is theelectrocorticography(ECoG) technique, in which electrodes are placed on the exposed surface of the brain to record the electrical activity of the cerebral cortex. However, because this requires a surgical incision in the skull, it is an invasive procedure.

There is also theelectroencephalogram technique, in which electrodes are placed on the scalp and send electrical signals to a recorder, which then converts them into wave-like patterns. The person must remain still with their eyes closed because any movement can alter the results.

Secondly, there arefunctional magnetic resonance imaging(fMRI) andfunctional near-infrared spectroscopy(fNIRS) studies, which provide real-time monitoring of tissue oxygenation in the brain while the subject performs a task or receives a stimulus. This allows brain functions such as attention, memory, and problem solving to be analyzed while the individual performs a cognitive task.

Thirdly, there is thepositron emission tomography(PET) technique, which identifies changes at a cellular level to detect the early onset of a disease.

According to Melanie, all of these brain activity measurement techniques can be used to observemovements, senses(is the person seeing, tasting, touching, or hearing?), cognition (memories, intentions), biometric components, language (words), and emotions.

But could they be used maliciously to guess what we are thinking? Well, there are a number of considerations to take into account before assuming this is possible. Some techniques are invasive, others are very expensive; some require physical access to the person who must remain still in a scanner, and others do not provide very high-quality data.

Yes, it is true that some fMRI procedures have produced records that were used to reconstruct what the personwas seeing(a face, a plane), but the cost is very high (about $600 per hour, according to Melanie) and takes an average of between one to three hours to complete.

So, this procedure is unlikely to be used maliciously; and in any case, it only shows what the person is actually seeing in that particular place,not a reconstructionof their most secret thoughts or memories.

Measurements aimed at reading language-related signals, using yes/no response experiments, are extremely useful for communicating with someone who cannot speak for themselves, but are equally useless for malicious purposes. The same is true forlie detection techniques, which operate on the basis of familiarity and the distinctive behavior of the brain when the option presented generates an emotion in the person.

Perhaps the only electroencephalogram method that could be useful for an attacker would be theN400 wave, which is related to semantic processing and is mainly activated due to unexpected words in sentences, such as John smeared the hot bread with a sock.

The magnitude of the signal varies according to how familiar it is to the subject; words, faces, images, or numbers can be used. So if the subject is shown many PIN numbers, they will react differently tothe combination they recognize.

However, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that the signal will intensify due to any significant stimulus, i.e. any combination of numbers that refers to something known to the person, which may not be their PIN or whatever is to be determined at that particular moment. Again, there are more limitations and costs involved than there are possible returns.

It is still extremely difficult for an attacker to exploit these signals, especially those that only show stimuli. If they had enough individual data from someone, they could build a model for generating signals that look like those individuals, butit would take a lot of computational power,which is currently impractical for an attacker, Melanie clarified.

Brain activity is unique for every individual, so you can never be fully anonymous, Melanie warned. So, if your patterns are in a database because you did an MRI scan, for example, you would beeasily identifiable.

And so the real concern should lie in the interpretation and protection of our data. Who has access to it? Is the clinic where you had your CT or MRI scan careful enough with your brain activity records? Or could they be compromised and used to identify you?

Of course, we still do not know what can be predicted with brain activity records, as they can beinterpreted in many waysand can vary over time for many reasons. For example, if you are in a car accident, the reaction you have to a car stimulus will be very different to the one you had before the accident.

Something that Melanie strongly recommends is to not contribute to the confusion of those who believe that our thoughts will soon be monitored, or that we will be able to control technology without physically interacting with it.

In fact, she does not think thatFacebooks projectto control computers with our brains is very feasible. This year, one of the companys divisions announced that it would be creating silent speech software that would allow you to type 100 words per minute by detecting brain waves, without the need for invasive surgery. But again, this is not very likely.

In conclusion, and as Melanie envisaged from the title of her talk, your thoughts remainsafe and private, for now.It is just a matter of taking care of who can access your brain activity data because, after all, it is as personal and sensitive as your DNA.

Author Sabrina Pagnotta, ESET

See the original post:
Neuroscience and security: your thoughts are safe (for now) - We Live Security (blog)

Neuroscience Symposium at St. Rita’s – Your News Now

Two alarm fire on North Jameson in Lima By Joseph Sharpe Digital Content Manager 2017-06-29T02:38:35Z

Thick black smoke billowed over Limaearlier this evening, as a city home goes up in flames.

The City of Lima just got a bit bigger in hopes of future development.

A three car accident snarls traffic at the intersection of Spencerville and Wapak Road.

Lima Municipal Court has earned final certification from the Ohio Supreme Court's commission on specialized dockets.

The Putnam County Commissioners dealing with a new lawsuit filed against them regarding the improvements done to County Road 5.

Heat from a garage fire caused damage to cars and surrounding buildings.

Marathon now has a distribution network to ship materials from the Utica Shale Region to other parts of Ohio and beyond.

Authorities in Van Wert County are searching for an inmate who didn't return to jail, after a medical furlough.

Since it was first identified in the United States more than 30 years ago, expanded treatment options for HIV have dramatically improved the lives of those affected.

A free manufacturing training course will be held at Rhodes State College starting July 10th.

See more here:
Neuroscience Symposium at St. Rita's - Your News Now

Merck’s Immunology and Cardiovascular Franchise in 1Q17 – Market … – Market Realist

Merck & Co.s Recent Developments and Valuations PART 10 OF 11

Merck & Co.s (MRK) Immunology franchise includes Remicade and Simponi. Remicade is one of the top-selling drugs for the treatment of inflammatory disorders, while Simponi is a once-monthly subcutaneous treatment. Both drugs reported a decline in revenues during 1Q17.

Remicades revenues fell ~34% to $229 million in 1Q17, compared to $349 million for 1Q16. This decline was due to the entry of generic competition and biosimilars following the loss of exclusivity of Remicade in the European markets in February 2015. Merck expects Remicades revenues to continue their declines, as new patients prefer biosimilars over Remicade.

While Merck has the marketing rights for Remicade in the European markets, Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) holds marketing rights of Remicade in several countries outside Europe.

Simponis revenues fell to $184 million in 1Q17, compared to $188 million in 1Q16.

Mercks Cardiovascular franchise includes the blockbuster drugs Zetia and Vytorin. These drugs are used for lowering the LDL cholesterol levels in the blood of patients with a high risk of cardiovascular disease.

The combined revenues for Zetia and Vytorin fell 35% to $575 million in 1Q17, compared to $889 million in 1Q16. Zetia competes with AbbVies (ABBV) Niaspan and Pfizers (PFE) Lipitor.

To divest company-specific risks, investors can consider the iShares Core High Dividend ETF (HDV), which holds ~3.5% of its total assets in Merck. HDV also holds 4.9% in Pfizer (PFE) and 1.5% in Eli Lilly & Co. (LLY).

Read the original:
Merck's Immunology and Cardiovascular Franchise in 1Q17 - Market ... - Market Realist

Scientists identify link between gut microbiota and mood, behavior – News-Medical.net

June 29, 2017

FINDINGS

Researchers have identified gut microbiota that interact with brain regions associated with mood and behavior. This may be the first time that behavioral and neurobiological differences associated with microbial composition in healthy humans have been identified.

BACKGROUND

Brain-gut-microbiota interactions may play an important role in human health and behavior. Previous research suggests that microbiota, a community of microorganisms in the gut, can influence behavior and emotion. Rodent models have demonstrated the effects of gut microbiota on emotional and social behaviors, such as anxiety and depression. There is, however, little evidence of this in humans.

For this study the researchers sought to identify brain and behavioral characteristics of healthy women clustered by gut microbiota profiles.

METHOD

Forty women supplied fecal samples for profiling, and magnetic resonance images were taken of their brains as they viewed images of individuals, activities or things that evoked emotional responses. The women were divided by their gut bacteria composition into two groups: 33 had more of a bacterium called Bacteroides; the remaining seven had more of the Prevotella bacteria. The Bacteroides group showed greater thickness of the gray matter in the frontal cortex and insula, brain regions involved with complex processing of information. They also had larger volumes of the hippocampus, a region involved in memory processing. The Prevotella group, by contrast, showed more connections between emotional, attentional and sensory brain regions and lower brain volumes in several regions, such as the hippocampus. This group's hippocampus was less active while the women were viewing negative images. They also rated higher levels of negative feelings such as anxiety, distress and irritability after looking at photos with negative images than did the Bacteroides group.

IMPACT

These results support the concept of brain-gut-microbiota interactions in healthy humans. Researchers do not yet know whether bacteria in the gut influence the development of the brain and its activity when unpleasant emotional content is encountered, or if existing differences in the brain influence the type of bacteria that reside in the gut. Both possibilities, however, could lead to important changes in how one thinks about human emotions.

Original post:
Scientists identify link between gut microbiota and mood, behavior - News-Medical.net

Anind K. Dey named dean of the UW’s Information School – UW Today

Administrative affairs | Education | For UW employees | News releases

June 29, 2017

Anind K. Dey has been named dean of the Information School at the University of Washington, President Ana Mari Cauce and Provost Jerry Baldasty announced this week. Dey comes to the UW from Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science, where he is the Charles M. Geschke professor and director of the Human-Computer Interaction Institute. His appointment is subject to approval by the UW Board of Regents.

Anind K. Dey

Anind brings great knowledge, insight and experience to the iSchool and the UW, Baldasty said. We are confident that he will build on the remarkable work by Dean Emeritus Mike Eisenberg and Dean Harry Bruce, whose combined vision and leadership has helped make the iSchool one of the premier schools of its kind in the country.

Bruce announced earlier this year his decision to step down as dean. This spring, U.S. News & World Report ranked the iSchool second among U.S. masters degree programs in library and information science.

In his research, Dey uses everyday technology (worn, carried and embedded in the environment) to develop tools and techniques for understanding and modeling human behavior, primarily within the areas of health, transportation, sustainability and education. Some of his work has involved using sensors to collect information on the activities of older people that could be used to better personalize their health care.

Dey has been a professor at Carnegie Mellon since 2005. He has also held positions at Intel Research in Berkeley from 2001 to 2004, and at the University of California, Berkeley, from 2002 to 2005.

Anind earned his bachelors degree in computer engineering from Simon Fraser University in Canada. He holds two masters degrees from the Georgia Institute of Technology one in aerospace engineering and one in computer science. He received his Ph.D. in computer science, also from the Georgia Institute of Technology.

Originally posted here:
Anind K. Dey named dean of the UW's Information School - UW Today

Documentary ‘Food Evolution’ turns to reason to discuss GMO controversy – Los Angeles Times

Calm, careful, potentially revolutionary, "Food Evolution" is an iconoclastic documentary on a hot-button topic. Persuasive rather than polemical, it's the unusual issue film that deals in counterintuitive reason rather than barely controlled hysteria.

As directed by Scott Hamilton Kennedy, "Food Evolution" wades into the controversy that makes the term GMO (genetically modified organisms) what Jon Stewart once called "the three most terrifying letters in the English language."

For what right-thinking citizen hasn't quailed at the thought of armies of artificially conceived zombie fruits and vegetables marching in lockstep under the command of monster corporation Monsanto until they take over the world.

As environmental activist Mark Lynas says, "its difficult to pay Monsanto a compliment. It's like praising witchcraft."

But taking as his theme a quote attributed to Mark Twain that posits, "It's easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled," filmmaker Kennedy wants us to consider the notion that much of what we feel about GMOs may be wrong.

Previously responsible for the splendid "OT: Our Town" and the Oscar-nominated "The Garden," about the plight of a 14-acre community garden in South Los Angeles, Kennedy is a veteran documentarian.

Here he's engaged the mellifluous voice of science celebrity Neil deGrasse Tyson as narrator and made sure to talk to people on both sides of the issue, partisans who, ironically, all have the same goal: safe, abundant food for everyone without the use of excessive toxic chemicals.

It is in fact the question of how to feed the staggering amount of people in the world more than 7 billion now, 9 billion by 2050 that was one of the stimuli that started Kennedy on this project. And he wants you to remember that trying to modify plants to emphasize desirable aspects is something farmers have been doing for a long time.

"Food Evolution" begins in Hawaii in 2013 when the big island's Hawaii County Council held hearings on whether to make the location into the world's first GMO-free zone.

That was ironic because Hawaii turns out to be a state with a major GMO success story, the rainbow papaya, which enabled papaya farming to come back from the dead after a devastating attack of disease in the 1990s.

While anti-GMO activists like Jeffrey Smith talk darkly of GMOs as "thoughtless, invasive species," the other side wrings its hands about pervasive doomsday tactics and distrust of scientific data.

"It's so much easier to scare people than reassure them," says writer Mark Lynas, with food authority Michael Pollan adding, "I don't believe fear-mongering has helped. I'm careful never to say GMOs are dangerous."

One statistic the film cites reveals the considerable gap 88% versus 37% between what scientists and laypeople say about whether GMOs are safe to eat.

"Food Evolution" takes time to carefully parse several issues that arise in the debate, like tumors in rats who eat GMO food (they get tumors no matter what they eat) and poundage versus toxicity in pesticide use.

The film also emphasizes that decisions made in the developed world can have global implications, exploring difficulties farmers in Uganda are having gaining access to the GMO bananas they want to combat decimation by disease.

"Food Evolution" certainly understands the larger factors that put GMO foods in the crosshairs: societal fury at corporate lying and greed, and distrust of Monsanto in particular as the developer of DDT and Agent Orange.

But finally the film is more troubled by the erosion of trust in science and by anti-GMO activists like Zen Honeycutt who says on camera that she trusts personal experiences of mothers more than the conclusions of scientists. As writer Lynas says, "If you throw science out, there is nothing."

Though it ultimately sides with the pro-GMO camp, "Food Evolution" makes some fascinating points about human behavior along the way, about how we don't make decisions based on facts as often as we think we do. This documentary may not change your mind, but it will make you consider what caused you to decide in the first place.

-------------

Food Evolution

Not rated

Running time: 1 hour, 32 minutes

Playing: Laemmle Monica, Santa Monica

See the most-read stories in Entertainment this hour

kenneth.turan@latimes.com

@KennethTuran

Excerpt from:
Documentary 'Food Evolution' turns to reason to discuss GMO controversy - Los Angeles Times

Facebook Makes a Step Towards Messenger Monetization – nwitimes.com

In order for Messenger to take off financially, Facebook (NASDAQ: FB) needs to "get a lot of businesses using it organically and build the behavior for people that they reach out to businesses for different things," according to CEO Mark Zuckerberg on the last earningscall. Therein lies the real opportunity for Messenger to transform the way that consumers interact with companies.

Earlier this year at its F8 developer conference, Facebook announced a new Discover section for Messenger, which is intended to showcase "amazing experiences" for people and businesses. Yesterday, the social network announced that the Discover section is now rolling out across the U.S. There are different types of things in Discover, like reading articles or getting sports news, but by far the most meaningful from an investing perspective is the potential to introduce users to branded chatbots.

Changing established human behaviors is hard, but there's been a growing trend of users turning to social media to reach customer support. That movement mostly started on Twitter (NYSE: TWTR), but Facebook has a real opportunity here to steal the show and run with it, particularly when it comes to creating a business out of the trend.

When this shift starting nearly a decade ago, there was speculationthat Twitter would start charging businesses that were using its service for customer service. Co-founder Biz Stone penned a blog post shooting down the idea, promising that Twitter would remain free for all accounts (corporate accounts or dedicated support accounts) with existing services. At the time, the company was still trying to brainstorm new services that it could offer companies for a fee, but Stone (who just recently returned to Twitter) said Twitter had no announcements to make then. There is now a small "Provides support" indicator next to official support accounts, but that's about it. Indirectly, support accounts may garner some user data from their interactions that could perhaps be used for ad targeting.

In the years since, Twitter has touted itself as an effective customer service platform -- examples here and here -- but has not announced any new revenue-generating products, which is a huge missed opportunity considering the simple fact that there's always more money in enterprise offerings than consumer ones. So while Twitter has seemingly hit a wall in terms of monetizing the growing trend of social media-based customer service, Facebook not only has an opportunity to become a leader, it also has a more viable route to monetization.

What's less clear is if Facebook is currently charging companies a fee to be included in the new Discover section. Considering how new it is, it wouldn't make much sense to charge. In His Zuckness' words, building that behavior is "the first thing that we need to do on Messenger and WhatsApp." Sending a message directly to a company is but a small behavioral step from tweeting at a company.

Automation has long been the hardest part about scaling up customer service for any organization. The chatbots that Facebook has been developing hope to solve that conundrum once and for all, much to the dismay of the roughly 2.7 million customer service representatives in the U.S. (as of May 2016, accordingto the Bureau of Labor Statistics) that could see their jobs threatened by chatbots.

Rudimentary chatbots have been around for decades, since the dawn of computing in the '50s and '60s. You've probably heard of the Turing test. The big difference between then and now is that the modern generation of chatbots hopes to carry conversations that are more organic and intuitive. They need to be able to follow conversations, understand context, and more. This is no easy task: Facebook's chatbot failure rate was recently estimated at 70%. Let's also not forget Microsoft's experimental chatbot Tay from last year, which was immediately commandeered into a genocidal, racist, sexist murderbot by Twitter trolls.

These are the two critical pieces to this puzzle: Facebook needs to both build up the consumer behavior while tackling the technical challenge of creating compelling chatbots for companies to use. Neither one is easy, but Facebook can work on both concurrently. Importantly, Facebook is not under financial pressure, since its core ad business is booming and shares are trading at all-time highs. Facebook can take its time to make sure it executes. You can't say the same about Twitter.

10 stocks we like better than Facebook

When investing geniuses David and Tom Gardner have a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor, has tripled the market.*

David and Tom just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy right now... and Facebook wasn't one of them! That's right -- they think these 10 stocks are even better buys.

*Stock Advisor returns as of June 5, 2017

Evan Niu, CFA owns shares of Facebook. Evan Niu, CFA has the following options: long January 2018 $120 calls on Facebook. The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Facebook and Twitter. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

See original here:
Facebook Makes a Step Towards Messenger Monetization - nwitimes.com