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

Google threatens to cut off news after California proposes paying media outlets

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 448 posts

Re: Google threatens to cut off news after California proposes paying media outlets

#201

Post by Terr_ »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #55

Isn’t the issue that Google links to websites and then reduces their commercial viability by showing summaries in search pages or by having their AI present the data without letting the website get the traffic? If so, I think a link tax is justified. At that point, Google is creating value for itself by removing value from others so it seems fair to me. And we don’t need the law to be perfect - let’s just make it app…

> If so, I think a link tax is justified.

I disagree, a "link tax" is the wrong choice of response, and incredibly dangerous to a free/distributed internet: Once it exists in principle its scope will not remain limited to affecting only big unsympathetic search-engine companies, it'll start affecting other sites (like, say, HN) and get abused to deter critics from pointing to the things they want to criticize.

If any source-page with a link is "summarizing" way too much about the destination... well, then there's already a mechanism for that: "Sue them for copyright infringement."

Right now things like titles and brief summaries and whatnot are clearly fair-use, but that's not guaranteed to be a defense against some future "you can't directly point at my page" law.

Re: Google threatens to cut off news after California proposes paying media outlets

#202

Post by codexb »

paxys wrote: post #150

"The news media industry is dying because of tech" is a massively successful myth perpetuated by the news media industry. Back in the day before tech platforms there used to be 5 successful news companies and 5 failing ones. Today there are 5 successful news companies and 500 failing ones. Tech reduced the barriers to entry and made the playing field more level, giving rise to smaller publications and indie journalis…

Yes and no. There were thousands of moderately successful local papers that really don't exist anymore. They had a handful of different revenue streams (classifieds, real estate and auto sales ads) that have all been gradually eaten into by internet competition.

Re: Google threatens to cut off news after California proposes paying media outlets

#203

Post by babypuncher »

zmmmmm wrote: post #170

I have sympathy for news publishers but I worry a lot about the principle of asserting that linking to something is an act that the link target has proprietary rights to over. At some level, it is almost a free speech issue. If I can't refer to what you are saying, without owing you something, you have power over not just my speech, but a power to limit how your work is subjected to criticism and debate. It's effecti…

If it was just plain hyperlinks, I would agree with you.

Google is scraping metadata and articles, and summarizing them so that most people never even need to click the link. Google is getting most of the value from the articles written while not doing the actual work to make them.

The whole thing could have been avoided if Google and social media stopped embedding previews and summaries everywhere.

It's worse in places like Facebook where they actively don't want you to actually follow the link. Facebook wants you to leave a like or a comment right there under the preview, then keep scrolling.

Re: Google threatens to cut off news after California proposes paying media outlets

#204

Post by shepherdjerred »

zmmmmm wrote: post #170

I have sympathy for news publishers but I worry a lot about the principle of asserting that linking to something is an act that the link target has proprietary rights to over. At some level, it is almost a free speech issue. If I can't refer to what you are saying, without owing you something, you have power over not just my speech, but a power to limit how your work is subjected to criticism and debate. It's effecti…

Maybe this isn't quite the same thing, but I had been threatened with legal action in the past for linking to a site's public assets: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26550846

Re: Google threatens to cut off news after California proposes paying media outlets

#205

Post by whycome »

wmf wrote: post #174
paxys wrote: post #45

I wonder if these media conglomerates think the same laws should apply to them. If your news article has any linked information in it, you need to pay money to the owner of that link every time your article is opened. Seems only fair.

They never link out though.

That's also absurd that modern news sites think they are so trustworthy that they don't even bother to cite or link to the studies or subjects they're talking about. Sometimes it's a bit insane when wikipedia only requires a link to a news site to consider something verified.

Re: Google threatens to cut off news after California proposes paying media outlets

#206

Post by bawolff »

babypuncher wrote: post #203
zmmmmm wrote: post #170

I have sympathy for news publishers but I worry a lot about the principle of asserting that linking to something is an act that the link target has proprietary rights to over. At some level, it is almost a free speech issue. If I can't refer to what you are saying, without owing you something, you have power over not just my speech, but a power to limit how your work is subjected to criticism and debate. It's effecti…

If it was just plain hyperlinks, I would agree with you. Google is scraping metadata and articles, and summarizing them so that most people never even need to click the link. Google is getting most of the value from the articles written while not doing the actual work to make them. The whole thing could have been avoided if Google and social media stopped embedding previews and summaries everywhere. It's worse in pla…

To be fair - that's what news sites do - they summarize information happening elsewhere.

Its hard to claim google is in the wrong for doing to news sites what news sites have been doing to other people since forever.

Re: Google threatens to cut off news after California proposes paying media outlets

#207

Post by AlbertCory »

dweymouth wrote: post #140
AlbertCory wrote: post #132

There's an inconvenient fact that Google prefers to ignore: -- Frequently, the headline and snippet is all you need. "Inflation still at 3%" is often enough for a lot of readers. An awful lot of them aren't going to follow the link. Yes, they are trying to preserve a business model that doesn't work, but that doesn't mean they have to provide free services to any and all. If Google just had a link labelled "News on I…

If you're a news site and you want Google to have a link like "News on Inflation", then just give your article the title "Unpacking the latest inflation data" and save the actual info for the article itself. A lot of internet publishers have already figured this out and it's why you see titles like "These 3 states have the most affordable homes" that just entice you to click on the link.

the problem is, they also want the headline to entice people to buy the paper. Contradictory desires.

Re: Google threatens to cut off news after California proposes paying media outlets

#209

Post by [deleted] »

zmmmmm wrote: post #170

I have sympathy for news publishers but I worry a lot about the principle of asserting that linking to something is an act that the link target has proprietary rights to over. At some level, it is almost a free speech issue. If I can't refer to what you are saying, without owing you something, you have power over not just my speech, but a power to limit how your work is subjected to criticism and debate. It's effecti…

[deleted]

Re: Google threatens to cut off news after California proposes paying media outlets

#210

Post by jrpt »

adrr wrote: post #135
burnte wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually agree with it too. Google and Facebook aren't the reason news outlets have cash problems and a free teat to latch on to isn't the answer. News is important, but let's fix the problem in a better way.

What is the problem with news? Why aren't people willing to pay for it?

I think a lot of people are willing to pay for journalism, but it has to be journalism above and beyond the basic info that you can get for free online. The basic news is commoditized and freely available online, and that's what a lot of traditional newspapers are competing with. However, paid industry journalism like The Information is something people are willing to pay for - or get their companies to pay for at least.

Also, I think traditional newspapers should position themselves so they're not competing with the lowest common denominator of basic info, however due to cutbacks, most newspapers are in essence not doing very much in depth journalism anymore, which means they are unfortunately positioning themselves as competing with any other source of news.

Post reply on HN