Some reflections on the Australian experience and what they might mean for Canada.
After Google’s move on Thursday, Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez sent a written statement calling the companies’ moves “deeply irresponsible and out of touch … especially when they make billions of dollars off of Canadian users” with advertising.
Australia’s regulatory experiment – the first of its kind in the world – also got off to a rocky start, but it has since seen tech companies, news publishers and the government reach a middle ground.
Hopefully we change this law. Trying to charge people for links is incredibly bad. There is no need for any law. If the news sites want to get money for links they can just put all their articles behind a login gate and make them not scrapable.
Trying to charge people for links is incredibly bad.
Good thing the law isnt charging people but the richest and most powerful corporations on the planet!
News sites used to generate a lot of ad revenue. Now, Google and Facebook combine to receive 80% of all ad revenue. If you see an ad online, it’s likely Google or Facebook got paid for it.
But why do they make so much ad money? Because they host links to what people want. They’re making tens of billions simply by hosting links to the content of others, who aren’t making money anymore because advertisers give their money to the link hosters and not the content creators. This “link tax” is a way to ensure the content creators get their fair share. Google and Facebook don’t create content, they link to it. Why should they get all the money?
I have no sympathy for ad driven businesses. Let me buy access to ad free news and I’ll be interested. Fundamentally this is because the traditional news business model stopped working and they never bothered to update to a model that does work. Instead, they want to legislate that they get paid without even trying to adapt or improve.
They want to make an example of Canada… When companies have enough power to even think about trying and make an example out of a country then they need to be dismantled or, even better, nationalized because it means they’re important enough to be considered utilities.
At this point I would support not backing down purely to set an example of our own.
Exactly. There are obvious problems with this conundrum and the government’s move is not ideal but then the situation we’re in is also not ideal. The implications of leaving it unmitigated are eating into our democracy and without a functioning democracy, there’s no functioning world wide web. And so as a firm supporter of the WWW, I find myself having to stick for our government and our media oligopoly (🤢) on this one even if it’s not ideal from the WWW lens. It feels a bit like chemotherapy. We have to do it even if we harm some systems because otherwise many more systems will go. 🤷
It’s not too much government regulation that is going to see you watch your children die choking on a toxic atmosphere.
You’re hoping Google “wins” a “fight” against the government of Canada for the regulation of its news business, and your rationale is that “government regulation of the internet” has contributed to “death”… and your example of that is North Korea?!!
That’s incredibly odd, sorry to say. It’s the strangest excuse for corporate bootlicking I have ever heard. It makes no sense at all to put all “governments” in the same category — Canada with North Korea and Russia, all in the same bag. And it’s even worse that you’re using these countries as examples when the news story here is about Canada making Google pay news publishers for use of their stories. Is this what North Korea does? North Koreans die by the thousands because their search engines have to pay the state news publisher?
If the Canadian government were smart, they’d start a massive campaign to encourage Canadians to move to using RSS readers for all their news – Google and Meta would lose their freaking minds, as it would let people read headlines and news summaries without even visiting their landing pages (less ad impressions) … hit 'em where it hurts!
Edit: Clarifying my thinking … maybe the Canadian government could propose to let Google et al. serve Canadian media outlet’s stories through their search sites… but only if they committed to supporting RSS/Atom feeds of the same articles. This would force them to open up their data a bit and make alternatives to visiting their sites more viable.
There is no way the general public would adopt RSS. The barrier to entry is just too high right now. Technology that delivers news needs to be idiot-proof and require basically 1-2 steps
Eg:
- click on the blue-green swirl
- type “Facebook”
Or:
- turn TV on
- change channel to news
Don’t get me wrong, RSS is great, but it’s also used exclusively by the computer-literate and it has been that way for basically 25 years.
RSS does not necessarily mean clunky UI and difficult to use. There are some pretty beautiful podcast apps with great content discovery features out there :)
No reason a news app that reads RSS needs to be more complicated than opening Facebook.
This is what I did on Friday. Took 20 minutes and set up a feedly account. It’s just like I did with Reddit a few weeks ago. Set up a Lemmy account, and moved on with my life. We can easily adapt.
Interesting, this is the first I heard of feedly. I did the same thing. Lemmy and I used some RSS reader from fdroid. Feedly app has pretty bad ratings… How are you liking it?
The government should be providing basic communication services. It’s criminal that private companies like Twitter are the de facto alert and information system for life saving government services. That kind of infrastructure needs to be socialized. Likewise we should have channels for publishing journalism that are not controlled by private capital.
I 100% agree with you.
It’s crazy that our gov is even using Facebook or Twitter for advertising their message. Why not use the fediverse instead ?!
If you are relying on Google and Meta/Facebook for news you are already not doing news correctly.
