this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2023
76 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7200 readers
380 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The destruction of the web... As if the web was social medias πŸ™„ If the web can't survive the disappearance of Facebook and article summaries then I don't want to use it anymore.

Sure, I'm the one arguing for news corporations to be compensated for the content they provide but I believe journalism has no value πŸ™„

Go check how much time people spend on each item on their feed on Facebook and how much time they spend on average on a web page vs just on Facebook every day and tell me again how Facebook is bringing traffic to traditional media!

[–] wvenable@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The destruction of the web… As if the web was social medias

Social media is just as part of the web as anything. Trying to carve out some exception for Facebook because you don't like them is not a logical argument. What about Wikipedia? Reddit? Lemmy? Digg? Google?

Go check how much time people spend on each item on their feed on Facebook and how much time they spend on average on a web page vs just on Facebook every day and tell me again how Facebook is bringing traffic to traditional media!

Please provide the receipts, then.

If people have to pay for links, how is that going to provide more traffic to traditional media? Isn't that the whole point of links... to provide traffic.

Facebook thinks people will spend just as much time on Facebook without news links. This whole law is pointless. It's trying to create a market for "links" that doesn't exist. Again, if media companies don't want to provide summaries and images to Facebook they can do that. Instead, all the major news papers in Canada put tags specifically for Facebook to use with their content. They want those links. So makes it valuable to them, not the other way around.

If all you just want to take money from Facebook and give it Canadian media companies, why not just make a law that does that.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

"people have to pay for links"

Now it's people that have to pay? What?

You know what's funny, you keep saying "It will be bad for media companies because it brings them clicks" but show me media companies complaining about the law then! Funny that, they don't!

La Presse's director even have an interview where he said "If they block our links then so be it, it's just sad that those who only inform themselves on social media will be losing on reliable information."

Man, that's the reaction of someone who fears he might lose money!

"If all you just want to take money from Facebook and give it Canadian media companies, why not just make a law that does that."

Let me present to you Bill C18!

[–] wvenable@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok. So Facebook doesn't care and the media companies don't care. I guess we'll see who blinks first.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If we look at history then...

It will be Meta and Alphabet.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/australia-says-law-making-facebook-google-pay-news-has-worked-2022-12-02/

They'll come back with their tail between their leg and say they're ready to negotiate if the law can be modified a bit and in the end they'll pay for Canadian news just like they already do with Australian news.

[–] wvenable@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If all that is needed to happen is that media companies withhold their content for Meta to capitulate then they could have done that. We don't need a law for that.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Looks much better to be able to say "We tried to negotiate, they didn't want to. The government tried to negotiate, they didn't want to. The government passed a law to force them to negotiate, they left the table and blocked us. We took all the reasonable steps and they are the ones who are unreasonable."

Anyway, what about smaller medias? You think Facebook would beg a local journal for a rural community to come back? As if.

[–] wvenable@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You know that the Australian law doesn't even apply to smaller medias right? It's unsurprising that a law basically written by Rupert Murdoch would include requirements that media companies have to be a certain size in order to eligible.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

So? Canada needs to negotiate the same deal is what you're saying?