I'm curious; this sounds a lot like the policies they tried in Canada. Won't the platforms just block link sharing like they did for Canadian publishers?
California
Welcome to /c/California, an online haven that brings to life the unrivaled diversity and vibrancy of California! This engaging community offers a virtual exploration of the Golden State, taking you from the stunning Pacific coastline to the rugged Sierra Nevada, and every town, city, and landmark in between. Discover California's world-class wineries, stunning national parks, innovative tech scene, robust agricultural heartland, and culturally diverse metropolises.
Discussions span a wide range of topics—from travel tips and restaurant recommendations to local politics and environmental issues. Whether you're a lifelong resident, a recent transplant, or planning your dream visit, /c/California is your one-stop place to share experiences, ask questions, and celebrate all the things that make California truly unique.
Related Communities:
Nearby Communities:
- California
- Bakersfield, CA
- Bay Area, CA
- Burbank, CA
- Fresno, CA
- Long Beach, CA
- Los Angeles, CA
- Oakland, CA
- San Diego, CA
- San Jose, CA
- San Francisco, CA
- Sacramento, CA
- Santa Clarita, CA
Possibly. I'm not sure if the bill makes any attempt to prevent such a thing from happening. But that's not the line of attack being used. What they're saying is that AB 886 is a massive giveaway for global news agencies.
It's not really the "global news agencies" that are suffering under free internet distribution of news.
It's the local news reporting that is being cut back to hardly anything that drives small communities to national news sources that destroy a local sense of community.
"This bill would prohibit a covered platform from retaliating against a digital journalism provider for asserting its rights under the act by refusing to access content" -- AB 886
This clause is an attempt to prevent these platforms from just blocking links to Californians and its news organizations.
It won't work. Forced speech has been regularly shot down in the courts for violating the first amendment.
Good point.
I’m not like you I guess. I don’t see or hear any ads in general. This is usually the kind of thing I’d research when I get my ballot. If you follow the money it’s usually pretty easy to tell.
But in this case, I think it’s too little too late for local journalism.
Well, it's an assembly bill, so it wouldn't go to a ballot.
Oh, right. Well then I guess I’ll just see how much my representative likes corporate donations.