Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook rejects calls to share advertising revenue with Australian media

asiatimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 100 posts

Re: Facebook rejects calls to share advertising revenue with Australian media

#71

Post by remotists »

ehnto wrote: post #24
remotists wrote: post #18

This just feels like the old gatekeepers are envious of the new gatekeepers. Neither of them deserve sympathy for the actions, however NewsCorp and Nine Entertainment might the first ones to buckle under this.

Here's hoping. NewsCorp have had a tangibly negative impact on my country, and likely everywhere they operate. If only all they wanted was profit, you could at least understand them. But they seem to want division and violence too. Someone needs to tell Rupert that he can't spend his money in a country that has fallen apart.

They want profit. Everything else is a by-product. If I as businessman want to put money on a media venture, I will choose the conservative side too.

Re: Facebook rejects calls to share advertising revenue with Australian media

#72

Post by triceratops »

twblalock wrote: post #63
tozeur wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a massive money drain out of Australia. Look at how aggressively China protects its businesses by blocking Facebook etc from operating in its borders.

That's not why China bans Facebook. China bans Facebook because it has a policy of internet censorship and government control of information.

Why not both?

Re: Facebook rejects calls to share advertising revenue with Australian media

#73

Post by Closi »

perilunar wrote: post #10
mrath wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope something good is implemented to favor local news agencies. I don't use facebook but I see how google get benefits of the other news channels. I mostly go to abc, news.com.au directly for news headlines. But I know lot of my friends use facebook for the latest news. This does not benefit the original content creator.

Why? I have no sympathy at all News Corp and Nine Entertainment. No one is forcing them to share content on Facebook if they don't like the deal. This is pretty clearly old media trying to shake down new media. (And tell your friends to stop using Facebook for news and go to a real news site.)

I think one argument is that the news papers do the recording, then if you share a link Facebook scrapes it, takes the image and puts it on their site (regardless of copyright/licensing status) and takes the news headline.

Most users then don’t click through, but the content is stolen to fill up facebooks timeline.

Re: Facebook rejects calls to share advertising revenue with Australian media

#74

Post by [deleted] »

bildung wrote: post #67
twblalock wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not why China bans Facebook. China bans Facebook because it has a policy of internet censorship and government control of information.

China would be perfectly capable of achieving that goal with Facebook in the country, just as with the domestic platforms.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook rejects calls to share advertising revenue with Australian media

#75

Post by im3w1l »

creato wrote: post #50
im3w1l wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a consequence of three things: 1. Facts can't be copyrighted. 2. Continuous publishing. 3. Google and Facebook cause a large preference for free content. If you do great journalistic work and try to charge for it, moments later (no longer a full day) someone else will change a few words around and offer it for free. And Google and Facebook will lead everyone to their story. Those who create value are unable to c…

> 3. Google and Facebook cause a large preference for free content. And hackernews. I think the most frequent kind of post on this site is a complaint about a paywall. The second most frequent kind of post is a workaround or alternative source sidestepping a paywall. edit: That's not to say the scale is anywhere near the same. HN is a not going to show up on any news site's radar. But the problem is the same.

Agreed. And I just want to clarify: I don't think there are any bad guys here. Just a dysfunctional system.

Re: Facebook rejects calls to share advertising revenue with Australian media

#76

Post by [deleted] »

fxtentacle wrote: post #61
missedthecue wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So a company getting outcompeted wants the government to force its competiton to give it free money. And you don't think that's absurd?

These newspapers aren't getting outcompeted. They are having their content stolen. If Facebook would prevent people from posting links from these newspapers and instead show an error message that says that it isn't allowed because Facebook doesn't want to pay for it, how do you think people would react?

[deleted]

Re: Facebook rejects calls to share advertising revenue with Australian media

#77

Post by octodog »

remotists wrote: post #71
ehnto wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's hoping. NewsCorp have had a tangibly negative impact on my country, and likely everywhere they operate. If only all they wanted was profit, you could at least understand them. But they seem to want division and violence too. Someone needs to tell Rupert that he can't spend his money in a country that has fallen apart.

They want profit. Everything else is a by-product. If I as businessman want to put money on a media venture, I will choose the conservative side too.

That's just wrong. News Corp has for years allowed its newspapers and editorial divisions to lose money or operate inefficiently while it can cross-subsidise them from cash cows such as Foxtel. It is quite clear that Murdoch highly values the influence that his media conglomerate can give him.

Yes, money is important too, but it is not the only thing that matters to the shareholders (a.k.a. Rupert Murdoch).

Re: Facebook rejects calls to share advertising revenue with Australian media

#78

Post by dmortin »

Closi wrote: post #73
perilunar wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? I have no sympathy at all News Corp and Nine Entertainment. No one is forcing them to share content on Facebook if they don't like the deal. This is pretty clearly old media trying to shake down new media. (And tell your friends to stop using Facebook for news and go to a real news site.)

I think one argument is that the news papers do the recording, then if you share a link Facebook scrapes it, takes the image and puts it on their site (regardless of copyright/licensing status) and takes the news headline. Most users then don’t click through, but the content is stolen to fill up facebooks timeline.

You can stop Facebook scraping your site via robots.txt, so the control is at the publisher. If FB crawler is blocked then it can't scrape anything and only the link is posted.

Re: Facebook rejects calls to share advertising revenue with Australian media

#79

Post by twblalock »

fxtentacle wrote: post #61
missedthecue wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So a company getting outcompeted wants the government to force its competiton to give it free money. And you don't think that's absurd?

These newspapers aren't getting outcompeted. They are having their content stolen. If Facebook would prevent people from posting links from these newspapers and instead show an error message that says that it isn't allowed because Facebook doesn't want to pay for it, how do you think people would react?

How is posting a link considered stealing content?

Re: Facebook rejects calls to share advertising revenue with Australian media

#80

Post by toast0 »

moksly wrote: post #55
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #9

Australia’s competition regulator, the ACCC, has estimated that Google and Facebook together earn some A$6 billion (US$4 billion) a year from advertising in the country. Leading news publishers have demanded the two companies pay at least 10% of that money each year to local news organizations. News organizations want ten percent of FB and Goog's advertising revenue? I guess I do too but this concept is facially absu…

From an American perspective, sure, but in a lot of countries we ask ourselves if letting these companies operate freely is a benefit for our society. I can see why moving money from Facebook to local news media would benefit Australia, and let’s not pretend we can’t force Google or Facebook to comply. Just look at what they are willing to do for China.

Even if I try to imagine an Australian perspective, demanding Google and Facebook pay the newspapers 10% of revenue seems pretty bizarre.

It would seem better to just charge a 10% tax on advertising, put that in the general fund, and then subsidise newspapers however you see fit, which may or may not amount to the same AUD but can more easily change over time.

Post reply on HN