Posted on 07/24/2024 1:37:59 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Three years ago, when Australian politicians took on the titans of Big Tech — crafting legislation to force Google and Facebook to pay for news articles they share on their sites — Google threatened to pull out of the country.
If the News Media Bargaining Code became law, Google Australia Managing Director Mel Silva said in a Senate hearing, the company would have “no real choice” but to stop making Google Search available in Australia.
Facebook‘s parent went further. After the bill passed the lower house of parliament, Meta blocked Australian news outlets from posting content on Facebook and prevented users across Australia from linking to news sites for six days.
But Google and Facebook did not carry through with their threats in Australia.
By the time the bill became law, the government had made a key concession: It allowed digital platforms to bypass regulation if they volunteered to make private deals with media companies. The result: Google and Facebook rushed to negotiate agreements with most major news outlets to get around regulations in the law.
Ultimately, Australian officials estimate, Facebook and Google doled out $166 million a year to Australian newsrooms — a tiny fraction of Alphabet and Meta’s combined value of more than $3 trillion, but substantial payments for many ailing media groups.
The Australian law is now a model for legislators in Sacramento who are proposing the California Journalism Preservation Act, a bill that would require tech giants to compensate media companies for accessing their news content.
The California legislation, which would be a first for the United States, comes as news outlets large and small struggle with a precipitous decline, laying off staff as digital platforms commandeer increasing chunks of advertising revenue. While the fate of the bill is still unclear,...
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
The first time I posted this article I thought it was about nationalizing big tech's news operations. I was wrong, as somebody pointed out. This is about big tech paying the originators for the articles they publish, which seems fair to me.
How much is fake news worth?
Basically Google took over the news with these payments in Australia. The mockingbird media in America went global with these actions.
Neither do I, but I do like to know their narratives-of-the-day.
Basically Google, Facebook Microsoft etc pay for news articles, then they will control all comments or shut off comments
Except big tech is even more incentivized to play around with the logarithms.
Big tech has already crossed the line between content creator and content carrier once they started censoring and now they're even more incentivized to do so.
Talking about paying for news. The brokers of knowledge still control the world but now the governments want to skim some of the action.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LexisNexis
LexisNexis is an American data analytics company headquartered in New York, New York. Its products are various databases that are accessed through online portals, including portals for computer-assisted legal research (CALR), newspaper search, and consumer information.[3][4] During the 1970s, LexisNexis began to make legal and journalistic documents more accessible electronically.[5] As of 2006, the company had the world's largest electronic database for legal and public-records–related information.[6] The company is a subsidiary of RELX.https://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/gateway.page
How many people know of, or remember this exists?
ProductsCase law,articles, publications, news, court documents, lawyer marketing, law practice management tools, media monitoring tools, supply management tools, sales intelligence solutions, and market intelligence tools
Law of unintended consequences.
Guarantee Google now says “publish what we want you to publish or you cease to be “news” on our search engine.
It’s the same with drug companies. No hard hitting news on drug companies because drug companies are the biggest advertisers on TV. Pfizer has them “hooked.”
Phillip Morris undoubtedly did the same back in the day.
The originators are perfectly free to establish a paywall and sell access. They don’t have to make content a available digitally at all. They could go back to selling newspapers and magazines printed on dead trees.
If originators place their content on an open forum, it should be ok for search engines to link to it.
Screw ‘em.
Put out something we want to see, or go busted.
One can only think of CNN in this. LOL
Where do they get this so called news from? I would bet most if not all is just plain lies and half truths at best.
If google hosts the articles, yes. If they just post a link to the article, the publishers should be paying google.
I just said something completely wrong the first time and the whole thread went in a false direction. I was just trying to correct that. I definitely don’t know everything about it.
No worries. I saw stupid stuff every day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.