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

151–160 of 448 posts

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

#151

Post by philipkglass »

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?

Facts are not copyrightable, so the meat of a story spreads quickly and with very little money changing hands. One subscriber to the Los Angeles Times can legally and immediately share the factual essence of an article via social media, personal web site, email, or anything else. From there it can be reshared indefinitely. Only people who really want to read the original reporting in full will pay to subscribe to the LA Times.

There used to be regional/temporal barriers in place before the Web was popular; newspapers had geographically limited distribution and it took time to print a new edition. One newspaper "scooping" another by one day was all it took to get people to buy the one-day-earlier publication. Also, 20th century newspapers collected significant revenue from classified advertising, people buying the paper just to get a weather forecast, and other kinds of information distribution that really didn't have anything to do with investigative news. The Web unbundled all that (weather.gov, Craigslist, etc.) and the only remaining strength of newspapers was producing original reporting. Which, unfortunately, was never all that profitable on its own even before you get to the "facts are not copyrightable" issue that I mentioned in my first paragraph.

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

#152

Post by unclebucknasty »

burnte wrote: post #130
kemayo wrote: post #6

I agree with Google on this one. Charging a fee just for linking to something is a bad idea. It does get fuzzier if you're also summarizing, and there's clearly some sort of spectrum from "just the URL" to "AI synopsis of the entire article". But at the level we see on Google News (headline + maybe a picture), I don't feel there's any good justification for charging.

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.

>free teat to latch on to isn't the answer

It's the news sites' content that Google is scraping and monetizing. How is it not Google that's latched on to a "free teat"?

Serious question. What am I missing?

EDIT: Thanks for the downvotes everyone. I need 'em from time-to-time to ensure I've not succumbed to The Matrix.

Of course, you're all wrong. But, keep 'em coming!

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

#153

Post by jedberg »

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #149
kemayo wrote: post #6

I agree with Google on this one. Charging a fee just for linking to something is a bad idea. It does get fuzzier if you're also summarizing, and there's clearly some sort of spectrum from "just the URL" to "AI synopsis of the entire article". But at the level we see on Google News (headline + maybe a picture), I don't feel there's any good justification for charging.

Just to think about this more, are there any other business types, besides online news, where your success so radically depends on the decisions (read google news ranking and summarization algorithms) of some other business that you have zero relations with. Google news+facebook+twitter can drastically change the revenue of any online news site with an internal decision. Where else do we see something like this in th…

Any retail store. Like Costco and Walmart. They can break an entire company by just buying from a competitor.

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

#154

Post by kerkeslager »

paxys wrote: post #134
kerkeslager wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not playing this game. I'm not claiming that the law was or wasn't repealed; I don't know. You're the one making the claim that it was repealed. Cite a source or you're just making things up.

You saying "I'm not seeing that anywhere" assumes you made the effort to look. People aren't going to do the homework for you. I don't have anything to prove. Google it and click the first result.

> You saying "I'm not seeing that anywhere" assumes you made the effort to look.

I did, and it's not a good faith argument to claim otherwise.

> People aren't going to do the homework for you.

You're the one making the claim. It's your homework, not mine.

> I don't have anything to prove.

You made a claim, so it is in fact yours to prove.

Given your refusal to back up your claim, it's beginning to look like you are just lying.

EDIT: I am seeing that there was an adoption of an EU regulation which modified the law, not repealed it, which is pretty different from the claim you're making[1]:

> BRUSSELS, June 22 (Reuters) - Alphabet (GOOGL.O) , opens new tab reopened Google News in Spain on Wednesday, eight years after it shut down the service because of a Spanish rule forcing the company and other news aggregators to pay publishers for using snippets of their news.

> Madrid last year transposed European Union copyright rules, revamped in 2020, into legislation, allowing media outlets to negotiate directly with the tech giant.

To be clear: Google is still required to pay publishers in Spain: the change is that the price is negotiable.

So, it's becoming clear now why you refused to link a source: because you are wrong. And since now I am making a claim, I'm linking it:

https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-news-re-opens-spai...

You know, the link upthread.

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

#155

Post by izacus »

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #149
kemayo wrote: post #6

I agree with Google on this one. Charging a fee just for linking to something is a bad idea. It does get fuzzier if you're also summarizing, and there's clearly some sort of spectrum from "just the URL" to "AI synopsis of the entire article". But at the level we see on Google News (headline + maybe a picture), I don't feel there's any good justification for charging.

Just to think about this more, are there any other business types, besides online news, where your success so radically depends on the decisions (read google news ranking and summarization algorithms) of some other business that you have zero relations with. Google news+facebook+twitter can drastically change the revenue of any online news site with an internal decision. Where else do we see something like this in th…

Yes, hundreds upon hundreds.

There isn't a single physical product that's not beholden to the Walmarts of the world to stock, market and highlight those products. There isn't a single farmer in this world that isn't dependant on stores buying off their produce and putting it into shelves.

Heck, even in paper era, there wasn't a single paper not beholden to kiosks and other stores to put their papers into racks and into premium places where customers are most likely to pick them up. Do you hink NYTimes demanded that street vendors pay them for the privilege of putting their paper onto a rack?!

Having fully vertically integrated bussiness (like you're mentioning) is a very modern development of monopolies.

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

#156

Post by dimator »

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #149
kemayo wrote: post #6

I agree with Google on this one. Charging a fee just for linking to something is a bad idea. It does get fuzzier if you're also summarizing, and there's clearly some sort of spectrum from "just the URL" to "AI synopsis of the entire article". But at the level we see on Google News (headline + maybe a picture), I don't feel there's any good justification for charging.

Just to think about this more, are there any other business types, besides online news, where your success so radically depends on the decisions (read google news ranking and summarization algorithms) of some other business that you have zero relations with. Google news+facebook+twitter can drastically change the revenue of any online news site with an internal decision. Where else do we see something like this in th…

Going back a few decades, newspapers were dependent on the newsstands they were sold out of. They could put your paper higher or lower on the stand (ranking).

Going back not as far, CNN was dependent on your local cable company to deliver their signal to homes. Charter or Comcast could choose to stop carrying a channel altogether.

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

#157

Post by olyjohn »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #152
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.

> free teat to latch on to isn't the answer It's the news sites' content that Google is scraping and monetizing. How is it not Google that's latched on to a "free teat"? Serious question. What am I missing? EDIT: Thanks for the downvotes everyone. I need 'em from time-to-time to ensure I've not succumbed to The Matrix. Of course, you're all wrong. But, keep 'em coming!

Let's stop trying to pick a side here... Maybe it's more of a symbiotic relationship. Google gets a useful news page, the news media get links to their articles.

I honestly could care less about either of them. I think they should just fight it out on their own and keep our legal system and tax payers time and money out of it.

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

#158

Post by izacus »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #152
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.

> free teat to latch on to isn't the answer It's the news sites' content that Google is scraping and monetizing. How is it not Google that's latched on to a "free teat"? Serious question. What am I missing? EDIT: Thanks for the downvotes everyone. I need 'em from time-to-time to ensure I've not succumbed to The Matrix. Of course, you're all wrong. But, keep 'em coming!

What exactly is being "monetized" when a search result is displayed for a news article that will bring the users to news site where they'll earn ad money to the news outlet?

The news outlet can use robots.txt to prevent indexing. If Google doesn't bring them value, there's the easy answer.

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

#159

Post by abdullahkhalids »

jedberg wrote: post #153
abdullahkhalids wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to think about this more, are there any other business types, besides online news, where your success so radically depends on the decisions (read google news ranking and summarization algorithms) of some other business that you have zero relations with. Google news+facebook+twitter can drastically change the revenue of any online news site with an internal decision. Where else do we see something like this in th…

Any retail store. Like Costco and Walmart. They can break an entire company by just buying from a competitor.

There is a business relationship between Walmart/Costco and the product or a competitor of the product. In the Google News case, there is no business relation with any news site (Alphabet ads might have a relation with the news site, but that is not Google News).
Post reply on HN