The Media Industry and the “Make-Google-Pay” Fantasy • Hacker News Board

Re: The Media Industry and the “Make-Google-Pay” Fantasy

#31

Post by eiaoa » Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 4:57 PM UTC

mailslot wrote: post #6

Local and major news sites alike, are cesspoools of intrusive advertising and tracking. They’re so poorly built, with so much advertising, that they hardly even function any longer. Even if Google links to a news site, I won’t click. It’s probably 30 secs for my new iPhone to partially fail loading, abruptly reload, and then auto play video I didn’t ask for... while covering the article with more ads that I have to c…

> Local and major news sites alike, are cesspoools of intrusive advertising and tracking. They’re so poorly built, with so much advertising, that they hardly even function any longer.

But that's an effect, though maybe one that will create a vicious cycle. It's not the cause. The revenue rug was pulled out from under local news websites, and they're struggling to keep the lights on. Advertising and tracking are how everyone says you need to make money on the internet nowadays, and they're just following the example set by Google, Facebook, et al.

Focusing too much local news site's advertising and tracking practices is missing the elephant in the room.

If local news is left to die, there will be little to no media oversight or local government. What happens in state legislatures is important, etc. If you require all these small organizations to have two competencies, you're going to get a lot more government corruption.

Re: The Media Industry and the “Make-Google-Pay” Fantasy

#32

Post by wmf » Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 4:58 PM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #30

vesinisa wrote: post #27

The very idea that the aggregator (Google) should pay the advertisers (news sites) for directing traffic to them is just patently absurd. By common sense, it should be the other way around. Sadly, the traditional media has a massive conflict of interest here, so the issue passed at least in my part of EU with little to no ado. But once the member states start enacting the directive to legislation, the manure will sur…

Is Google News really that big a deal for publishers? Considering all the places where they voluntarily put their content (Facebook, Twitter, Apple News, etc...), is the loss of Google News really a problem? I don't see anything magic about Google News that isn't done better (Apple News), or more thoroughly (Twitter) elsewhere.

Presumably the publishers intend to strong-arm all those sources into paying them.

Re: The Media Industry and the “Make-Google-Pay” Fantasy

#33

Post by whatshisface » Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 5:02 PM UTC

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #29

wbl wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No because you can publish it yourself. We don't need giant middlemen to use the Internet.

While that is true, it is quite difficult to compete against ad-revenue-driven content creation.

Eventually, people will have to run ads on their own websites, the same as before Youtube. There will be a lot less video content because serving video is a tough thing.

Re: The Media Industry and the “Make-Google-Pay” Fantasy

#34

Post by IanCal » Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 5:03 PM UTC

paol wrote: post #9

I'm a lot less worried about the "link tax" clauses than the copyright liability clause. Not because the link tax is a good idea but because it's a spectacular own goal that is mainly going to hurt the idiots who lobbied for it. Giving companies direct liability for policing copyright in user-uploaded content is a much bigger disaster, on two separate fronts, both highly damaging: 1) Implementing youtube-style conten…

> 1) Implementing youtube-style content id will be a huge burden for small companies.

There's stuff in every version I've read about the measures required being different due to size so I don't really follow the point here.

And people on the other end (the uploaders) must have recourse, there's a mandated appeals process unlike the current situation.

Re: The Media Industry and the “Make-Google-Pay” Fantasy

#35

Post by martinlaz » Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 5:05 PM UTC

vesinisa wrote: post #27

The very idea that the aggregator (Google) should pay the advertisers (news sites) for directing traffic to them is just patently absurd. By common sense, it should be the other way around. Sadly, the traditional media has a massive conflict of interest here, so the issue passed at least in my part of EU with little to no ado. But once the member states start enacting the directive to legislation, the manure will sur…

Or maybe people will start going directly to their favorite news outlets? That's very low effort. At least, I can see myself doing that...

Re: The Media Industry and the “Make-Google-Pay” Fantasy

#36

Post by IanCal » Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 5:06 PM UTC

vesinisa wrote: post #27

The very idea that the aggregator (Google) should pay the advertisers (news sites) for directing traffic to them is just patently absurd. By common sense, it should be the other way around. Sadly, the traditional media has a massive conflict of interest here, so the issue passed at least in my part of EU with little to no ado. But once the member states start enacting the directive to legislation, the manure will sur…

The problem though is not that aggregators link to the news articles, but the concern of them containing so much

And if Google are making a profit by bringing eyeballs to their site using other people's content, shouldn't it be up to the people who created that content to choose how to negotiate that? They're free to let Google take the content for free / pay Google to take the content if they want, unless there's something in article 11 that I've missed.

Re: The Media Industry and the “Make-Google-Pay” Fantasy

#37

Post by JustSomeNobody » Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 5:08 PM UTC

How does this conversation go? I mean, seriously, were people sitting in a room thinking, ok, so Google gives us free advertisement, but what if we were to get them to pay us to advertise for us? And everyone just nods and agrees? What the heck?

Greed. Everywhere. You just can't escape it. I'm so disappointed in people these days.

Re: The Media Industry and the “Make-Google-Pay” Fantasy

#38

Post by ma2rten » Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 5:11 PM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #30

vesinisa wrote: post #27

The very idea that the aggregator (Google) should pay the advertisers (news sites) for directing traffic to them is just patently absurd. By common sense, it should be the other way around. Sadly, the traditional media has a massive conflict of interest here, so the issue passed at least in my part of EU with little to no ado. But once the member states start enacting the directive to legislation, the manure will sur…

Is Google News really that big a deal for publishers? Considering all the places where they voluntarily put their content (Facebook, Twitter, Apple News, etc...), is the loss of Google News really a problem? I don't see anything magic about Google News that isn't done better (Apple News), or more thoroughly (Twitter) elsewhere.

They are referring to news snippets that show up in Google Search (not the Google News app on your phone). Those are one of the most significant sources of traffic for publishers.

Re: The Media Industry and the “Make-Google-Pay” Fantasy

#39

Post by vorpalhex » Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 5:12 PM UTC

IanCal wrote: post #34

paol wrote: post #9

I'm a lot less worried about the "link tax" clauses than the copyright liability clause. Not because the link tax is a good idea but because it's a spectacular own goal that is mainly going to hurt the idiots who lobbied for it. Giving companies direct liability for policing copyright in user-uploaded content is a much bigger disaster, on two separate fronts, both highly damaging: 1) Implementing youtube-style conten…

> 1) Implementing youtube-style content id will be a huge burden for small companies. There's stuff in every version I've read about the measures required being different due to size so I don't really follow the point here. And people on the other end (the uploaders) must have recourse, there's a mandated appeals process unlike the current situation.

I'm sure you'll be able to fill out a form and get an email a day later, "We're sorry, we've reviewed your case but have decided against you (because we have no reason to ever take any risk)"

The DMCA is a shining example of just how well these appeals processes work...

Re: The Media Industry and the “Make-Google-Pay” Fantasy

#40

Post by jopsen » Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 5:15 PM UTC

whatshisface wrote: post #33

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While that is true, it is quite difficult to compete against ad-revenue-driven content creation.

Eventually, people will have to run ads on their own websites, the same as before Youtube. There will be a lot less video content because serving video is a tough thing.

I'm sure there are cloud providers out there offering this rather cheap...

And it's only going to be cheaper in the future :)