The amount of people that don’t understand how important a news propagator like Google is is mind-blowing. Access to information is a right. This beats this right down to a pulp.
“HURR DURR GOOGLE BAD HUE HUE GOOD RIDDANCE HUE HUE I’M LE INTELLECTUAL”
Really sad. This fucked every news org. Hard. Except the big ones that own everything.
Why should Google have control over the propagation of news? Everyone can still go to the individual news organisations’ website…yes Google consolidated everything into one portal, but maybe it’s time to go back to something less centralised, which isn’t under the control of a single corporate entity, i.e. the way the web was originally intended to work.
Same reason you’re using Lemmy and don’t just go to browse every single individual website on the internet.
So then we need a non-corporate portal for news. Centralising the power of information distribution with massive companies that are driven solely by profit is not the way.
It’s a joke that Google calls this drivel news anyway. Good riddance.
Honestly, I don’t know what the lawmakers expected. The bill is dumb. It’d be perfectly fine to require payment for copying a substantial amount of a new article (eg, if they want to prevent google from offering a public cache that gets around paywalls). But the bill outright requires paying to link to Canadian news sites in search results. That’s outright madness.
Y’all can hate google and meta all you want. That’s totally fine. I encourage you to use competing search engines (it’s bad that Google has a near monopoly). But this bill is a bad bill.
The folks on this site might know about alternatives, but the average person doesn’t. When the average person can’t find Canadian news sites on Google, they’re not going to switch to duck duck go or whatever. They’re going to just use a non Canadian site. This bill is going to hurt Canadian news companies and it’s disappointing to see people cheering it on because you’re happier to see Google and meta hurt than you are sorry to see Canadian news sites hurt…
yeah the scraping content is the issue, not the linking. So this bill is pretty stupidly formed. They can simple require google/meta only provide line, title and max 250 letters abstract/trimmed first paragraph(excluding space and punctuation.)
They(Canadian medias) want the traffic to their site so they can display sponsor ads or sell subscriptions.
It’s the control over the advertising that’s the issue. Scraping content is fine, as long as it’s following copyright laws.
The issue is that the Toronto Star used to make most of their money by being able to offer prime advertising space next to its articles. The rest of their money was from subscriptions and newspaper sales, which people were willing to pay because it was the only way to get the news in a portable form.
More money for newspaper ads meant more money available to journalists, which made the advertising space next to those columns more valuable. It was a virtuous cycle where the better your journalists were, the more valuable the ad space next to them became. Nowadays, Meta and Google control that ad space and take a massive cut of any ad shown there.
At the same time, someone doesn’t need to own a printing press to make an article available, thanks to the Internet. That means that mediocre quality “citizen journalism” and low-quality press releases compete for ad space in a way they didn’t in the heyday of print journalism. The idea of “buying a newspaper” is gone and will probably never come back because mobile internet meant that getting access to news (and other content) was just so easy.
Meta and Google get virtually all their money from ads. The way to reduce their impact on Canadian journalism isn’t to force them to pay some kind of “link tax”, it’s to address their ads monopoly and give back control over ads to the publishers.
I am not sure if I am missing something here, if directing the viewer to website and website display the content+ad, how does google take a cut? Google take a cut from sponsored link right? So if the media feel that paying for the link redirection is an extortion, then don’t buy sponsored links right?
I am old enough that I know what news is like before internet, so to compete the eyeballs and attract regular/repeat users, your content needs to be in top quality. And we all know how it’s not the “media” controlling ads, it’s the other way around, it’s who paid for ad space controlling the media. And to be honest, it was never a good healthy cycle anyway.(see TV ads, new paper ads, youtube ads, and intrusive web ads), faster and shorter engagement time means less conversion, and usually it means worse content overtime as sites try everything to prolong engagement time. (ie. sponsored content, embeded autoplay, more “next page”, more “releated” “you might also be interested” links with clickbait title/thumbnail, etc, etc.)
People ARE statistics, there are portion of people that are considering buying certain thing, so owning your social interation/search data leads to higher associations, thus more effective ads. It’s the sole reason why Google/Meta’s business work, cause they can do user targeted ads.
Let’s be honest, journalist quality is going down the drain as well. Like almost 30~40% of content is lagging social network for about minimum half day up toward a week. Maybe articles are just glorified blog post of referencing social media posts. Don’t get me wrong, people do crave quality content articles, it’s just that majority of time, even when posted to say special interest sub-reddit, the content itself is really lacking. ie. say, compare the hardware review from early 2000 and now(after 2020), it takes “longer” to get to the point, it was filled with many charts that aren’t really interesting(cause we know benchmark and game performance are usually have special driver treatment etc.), less article explains the important architecture changes, how much it would affect your experience(just copy paste sponsor marketing material), talking about the hard points like is it worth the upgrade, longevity, etc. It’s so bad that usually, asking in a specific gaming sub or discord about certain hardware gives you less biased feedbacks and chances are, they also give you links to cheaper vendor or links to price tracker. Hardware review sites gives you none of that(here is our sponsored market place, please support us by using the linkes below, blah.)
Last but not least, the intrusive full screen blocking shit when I just view the article’s first paragraph and scroll 2 mouse wheel ticks down. How can a website expect me to subscribe without at least let me check 1 article? heck, like even 1 page or something before you pop that thing and ask me to subscribe. I am trained in a way that if I clicked an external link and see that full screen block, I just ctrl+w and close that tab. It is not worth my time. And I am the type of guy that whitelist sites that are actually helpful or pay visit often. The media sites aren’t doing their best to keep or invite random visitors to come again. It’s pretty much the same shit if you just scroll through Edge’s suggested contents.( which I have to turn off everytime if the update reset my settings. ) They have to provide something where people are willing to stick around.
Greedy google doing greedy google things.
F*ck these bozos who dont understand how much this is going to screw canadian news sites. They just see google gets owned and support whatever tf it is like sheep. Awful law
I am amazed at how people don’t understand that vague law that takes out there “Current enemy” could be used against them down the road… THERE IS NO SUPPORT OF GOOGLE or facebook… it is a bad law that could be turned around to start playing whack mole with lemmy instances in the future, especially those run by a Canadian entity or on canadian hosting.
Are you presuming that it never becomes popular? All three aspects vaguely describe the intermediary as being more popular than the news operator. If lemmy takes off and becomes the next Reddit and people go to it to catch up on the latest news it would be a factor.
Just because it does not fit today does not mean it isn’t a bad law. It would essentially apply to ANY site that becomes popular and links to a canadian news outlet.
I’m not sure what they expected. An EU country (I can’t remember if it was Spain or Italy) tried this and Google just left. Then the news outlets begged for the law to be repealed. Google has a monopoly on search. If people can’t find you there, you’re gonna have a bad time because of your traffic free fall.
There are other search engines, and bing became a lot better with the gpt integration
Sure, but the question is do the masses know about it? It’s all great to have principles until you have to consider how you’re gonna make payroll. We’ll see if I’m wrong, but I’m not sure that the world has moved away from Google domination yet.
I think with MS pushing edge and bing as suggest defaults some less tech savvy folks just use it. I think change is slow but people are looking for selfhosted solutions to avoid the “pray I don’t alter the deal” situations, and anonymous google free search such as whoogle. You also have phone OS makers building microG option and aurora store so you can get playstore apps without being forced into a google (tracking) account. Maybe those will not become mainstream, but we will see.
