Live data from Hacker News

Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

reuters.com

51–60 of 98 posts

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#51
post #3

Has the Canadian government exempted articles about the wildfires from fees? If not, they don't really have any right to complain that Facebook doesn't want to pay to share them. At the end of the day, they're a private company who are looking to make a profit, not an emergency broadcast system.

it's so freaking disingenuous when hyperregulatory twerps pass this kind of crap, then wait for a disaster, then soyface at facebook like "see what they're doing!! this is a critical natural disaster tool!" well then maybe yall shouldn't've broken the business model, geniuses. i neither use nor like facebook but this is an obvious mistake.

The problem is that companies that successfully become monopolies like this - especially over critical public functions like communication - shouldn't be allowed to be private. At that point, they've made themselves utilities.

But the free marketeers have such a grip on public policy here in North America that the governments aren't able to take the appropriate regulatory action: Either nationalize them and make them a utility or break up the monopoly so you don't have a behemoth with so much power over a critical function like communication.

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#52
post #3

Has the Canadian government exempted articles about the wildfires from fees? If not, they don't really have any right to complain that Facebook doesn't want to pay to share them. At the end of the day, they're a private company who are looking to make a profit, not an emergency broadcast system.

Here in Brazil they tried to sneak in similar provisions into a fake news law. They actually preempted Facebook's move by simply writing into law that social media companies have no right to block the links as retaliation.

Then block users! Governments have nothing on tech talent and that’s their loss

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#53
post #15
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, at the end of the day, they are SO BIG that they are more like a public place/space, where you cannot really dictate your own rules, even as a owner of such place (for example restaurants is some countries. cell phone network operators.). FB should really cut the bullshit.

If they are a public space, why are the government charging them for what the public do in that space? I don't disagree with you, they aren't 'just' a private company. But through that optic the CA govts policy makes even less sense.

>>> If they are a public space, why are the government charging them for what the public do in that space?

I dunno, I was just stating the obvious, because someone had to do it. All sides should cut the crap and abuse (FB, Canada, news publishers).

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#54
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When they stop existing, that’s less money. What I mean is that the postal service provides a server, people mailing letters. Facebook’s service is people messaging each other. If people started sending links to each other in the mail and it kills newspapers, should the postal service pay? People message all sorts of stuff on Facebook. And it frequently causes companies to make less money and/or stop existing. That d…

Ok so to make your postal service analogy accurate let’s add a detail: whenever you send a newspaper clipping the postal service opens the letter and inserts a piece of junkmail. Ok now imagine the gov passes a law saying “if you insert junkmail into a letter containing a newspaper clipping, you have to pay a fee to the newspaper”. Where’s the problem? Either they stop inserting ads, or they pay. As for “make less mo…

> Where’s the problem? Either they stop inserting ads, or they pay.

Well, one pretty big problem is that nothing analogous to "stop inserting" ads is an option provided by the law as passed in reality. You've made it up to make the law sound better than it is. That you had to resort to such fibbing seems like a pretty good indicator on how flawed the bill is.

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#55
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they are SO BIG that they are more like a public place/space, where you cannot really dictate your own rules The Canadian government disagrees. They think Facebook stands to have significant financial gain for the privilege of their users sharing Canadian news sites, to the point where Facebook has to pay a fee for that privilege. You can't simultaneously say "Facebook is a public place, people should be allowed to…

I don't see the quandary. FB has managed to make themselves a defacto public space, they should not however be allowed to extort that position.

And yet the government extorts all similar public spaces

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook wants to make money off selling ads next to other people’s content. News media wants to get paid for the content they pay to create. Who’s rent seeking again?

So you should be happy now that they are no longer making money off wild fire articles in canada?

At the end of the day we're watching the fabric of society disintegrate (maybe I'm going a bit hyperbolic?) but we're cheering for the corporations.

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#57
As a Canadian, trying to wrap my head around this whole kerfuffle reminds me of an old South Park episode (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeWn3Sso2RE). Naturally. Slightly abbreviated:

> So... What exactly does Canada want?

> We want ... more ... moneh.

[dramatic pause]

> Yeah, more moneh!

> More money from where?

> How-how 'bout the Internet! The internet makes lots of moneh. So give us some of that moneh!

> Yeah, give us internet moneh!

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#58
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case I hate to have to agree with Meta. The Canadian government created the problem with its flawed policies designed to prop up a dying business model.

Is it "dying business model" or the public good that the Canadian government are responding to? Seems like the loss of local news has become more like a dying societal model.

You’re squarely on the side of protectionist government funded media here like the CBC, not local news

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the quandary. FB has managed to make themselves a defacto public space, they should not however be allowed to extort that position.

And yet the government extorts all similar public spaces

There's a bizarre trend I have seen in the past decades where "The Government" is being portrayed as the enemy — not as the construct we have created to represent the wishes and needs of the people and society. Corporations are portrayed as our saviors at best — or at worst, excused for doing whatever they need to to make their shareholders a return on their investments.

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#60
post #57

As a Canadian, trying to wrap my head around this whole kerfuffle reminds me of an old South Park episode ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeWn3Sso2RE ). Naturally. Slightly abbreviated: > So... What exactly does Canada want? > We want ... more ... moneh. [dramatic pause] > Yeah, more moneh! > More money from where? > How-how 'bout the Internet! The internet makes lots of moneh. So give us some of that moneh! > Yeah…

Unfortunately the only expertise politicians understand is making money so hopefully meta starts seeing the value of lobbying
Post reply on HN