Over 200 newspapers now involved in lawsuits vs. Google, Facebook • Hacker News Board

Re: Over 200 newspapers now involved in lawsuits vs. Google, Facebook

#111

Post by worker767424 » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 8:53 PM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #5

First, there's no mention of the legal theory under which they're claiming damages. Is this something to do with caching, aggregation, AMP, or what? The only thing the article touches on is Google being a monopoly for ads, but that would seem to be a very small part of how Google contributed to undermining the news industry. Also even if these newspapers are successful, does anyone foresee any of the damages actually…

> private equity firms

Well that's clever.

PE is known to do interesting things. I would not have thought that part of the value they saw in dying newspapers is a well-timed lawsuit against big tech. Even if it only has a 25% chance of winning, I could see PE taking that bet and baking it into the value of the scraps they bought.

Here's a good, long read about what's been going on with newspaper ownership.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/11/alden-g...

Re: Over 200 newspapers now involved in lawsuits vs. Google, Facebook

#112

Post by willhinsa » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 8:54 PM UTC

kragen wrote: post #73

This was predicted in the EPIC 2014 video in 02004. If you haven't seen it, it's a very thought-provoking look at the future of news. The original requires Flash, of course. It got a few things wrong. It doesn't mention filter bubbles and algorithmic radicalization, for instance.

I'd never heard of this before. I found a copy on YouTube, and it's fantastic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUHBPuHS-7s

Re: Over 200 newspapers now involved in lawsuits vs. Google, Facebook

#113

Post by harles » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 8:56 PM UTC

KarlKemp wrote: post #96

jccalhoun wrote: post #78

I have long said the problem with paying for news is that it is rarely worth paying for. When I was in grad school there was a program that gave us "free" copies of the NYTimes and USA Today (I'm sure part of our tuition paid for it but all we had to do was swipe our student id to open the newspaper box). I would get them every day and there were rarely more than one story in them that I would actually read.

It's the rare product where it's good for you even when others consume it. Sort-of like a vaccine, but for democracy.

Unless it’s more of a horse dewormer for democracy, which I fear a lot of media is headed towards.

Re: Over 200 newspapers now involved in lawsuits vs. Google, Facebook

#114

Post by Spivak » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 8:56 PM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #98

jccalhoun wrote: post #78

I have long said the problem with paying for news is that it is rarely worth paying for. When I was in grad school there was a program that gave us "free" copies of the NYTimes and USA Today (I'm sure part of our tuition paid for it but all we had to do was swipe our student id to open the newspaper box). I would get them every day and there were rarely more than one story in them that I would actually read.

I would get them every day and there were rarely more than one story in them that I would actually read. Maybe the problem wasn't the paper. The New York Times' target audience isn't grad students. I don't think it's all that surprising that you weren't all that interested in it. As we get older, we change. We learn more. We become interested in more things. Depending on how long it's been since grad school, you may…

The problem is that this doesn't address who the target audience for the NYT actually is. I'm young and interested in lots of things. Going by just the section headings, except for sports, I should adore getting the paper. The content is absolute garbage though. I come away having learned nothing and no more informed than if I just read the headline. It's not even entertaining as a consolation prize.

Like I'm basically exactly the right blend of pretentious artsy liberal yuppie but I've found my niches other places.

Re: Over 200 newspapers now involved in lawsuits vs. Google, Facebook

#115

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 8:57 PM UTC

anonAndOn wrote: post #108

kaesar14 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The New York Times target audience isn’t a highly educated young American? Maybe that’s the problem, as pointed out?

> young No. Middle-career and beyond because you probably can't afford tickets to the Met gala if you're <35.

[deleted]

Re: Over 200 newspapers now involved in lawsuits vs. Google, Facebook

#116

Post by ghaff » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 9:00 PM UTC

annexrichmond wrote: post #32

freediver wrote: post #4

Newspapers allowed Google and Facebook to drag them to their territory of online ad-monetized business models in which they have no way of competing (because of tech discrepancy). This then led to deterioration of journalism and its inevitable transformation into sensationalism and entertainment, again driven by the incentives of the ad-monetized business model, because clickbait makes more ad money. It is a sad stat…

I'd love a subscription service that gives me access to all my local news sources

The problem is that, increasingly, those local news sources simply don't exist. My town doesn't have a newspaper. There's a website that hosts local news in my state but there is just hardly ever anything there. I get more news from Facebook or Next Door.

Re: Over 200 newspapers now involved in lawsuits vs. Google, Facebook

#117

Post by lordnacho » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 9:01 PM UTC

bb611 wrote: post #35

hash872 wrote: post #19

I'd imagine these lawsuits' chance of success will very strongly hinge on where they are impaneled. A jury in a conservative, working class or populist area will probably be pretty sympathetic to striking back at Big Tech, regardless of how weak the merits of the case are. An appeals court may later throw the verdict out. To my understanding, the US is the only developed democracy to still use juries for civil matter…

> I am personally anti-populism, and think that civil cases with large financial stakes should be decided by an (appointed not elected) judge- not a random group of folks who can afford to skip work for two to four weeks. US Federal judges are all appointed, not elected, so not much to worry about there. The judge and jury serve different purposes in the US system. The judge's job is to decide questions of law, the j…

A bunch of randoms might not be good at deciding the facts. You'd think someone experienced would be better at this than a load of people who won't be held to account.

Re: Over 200 newspapers now involved in lawsuits vs. Google, Facebook

#118

Post by erik_seaberg » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 9:02 PM UTC

freediver wrote: post #34

deadalus wrote: post #28

I HATE clicking on a Google link and discovering that it's paywalled. It's a massive waste of time.

How is Google supposed to know if you have access or not? (because if you have, and it doesn't show you the relevant result, it is doing a disservice to you)

Even if I were to subscribe to a hundred newspapers (which nobody does), that would leave tens of thousands I don’t. Google should avoid showing me results that are 99% useless.

Re: Over 200 newspapers now involved in lawsuits vs. Google, Facebook

#119

Post by Guest42 » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 9:03 PM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #114

reaperducer wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would get them every day and there were rarely more than one story in them that I would actually read. Maybe the problem wasn't the paper. The New York Times' target audience isn't grad students. I don't think it's all that surprising that you weren't all that interested in it. As we get older, we change. We learn more. We become interested in more things. Depending on how long it's been since grad school, you may…

The problem is that this doesn't address who the target audience for the NYT actually is. I'm young and interested in lots of things. Going by just the section headings, except for sports, I should adore getting the paper. The content is absolute garbage though. I come away having learned nothing and no more informed than if I just read the headline. It's not even entertaining as a consolation prize. Like I'm basical…

Even worse on the internet when the headline obfuscates the info promising something that isn’t there.

Re: Over 200 newspapers now involved in lawsuits vs. Google, Facebook

#120

Post by KarlKemp » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 9:10 PM UTC

harles wrote: post #113

KarlKemp wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the rare product where it's good for you even when others consume it. Sort-of like a vaccine, but for democracy.

Unless it’s more of a horse dewormer for democracy, which I fear a lot of media is headed towards.

The cynicism "the media" gets is entirely boring and mostly wrong. If you read one of WSJ/NYT/WashPo and never get near youtube, you will be well informed.

But the actual problem with your statement is that it implies some alternative to "the media", and/or that it's said as if the world without the news media is somehow similar to the one we currently life in. There isn't and it wouldn't: a democracy is a regulatory system that needs the feedback loop just like your AC needs to get measurements from a thermometer to adjust its settings. Take out that part, and democracy is done for.