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

Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

about.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 478 posts

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#71

Post by CydeWeys »

anonymousab wrote: post #57
DevKoala wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook can say a lot of things, but I bet the publishers also have their own numbers and they are the ones who pushed for this deal.

They could have blocked Google and Facebook at any time. They didn't because they know the value is important if not existential. What they want is for Facebook and Google to be forced to list them, but also forced to pay for the privilege. If they failed to craft or pay for legislation to that end, it was nothing more than a mistake.

> What they want is for Facebook and Google to be forced to list them, but also forced to pay for the privilege. If they failed to craft or pay for legislation to that end, it was nothing more than a mistake.

Such legislation is impossible given that Google/Facebook are not Australian companies. At the end of the day, if the legislation makes their involvement in those countries a net negative for their bottom lines, they can and will take their ball and go home.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#72

Post by g_p »

bpodgursky wrote: post #56
bwb wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't people just visit news sites like normal? You go to cnn.com or nytimes.com or your local newspaper. Thats it, just don't allow it at FB. People post so many fake stories from fakes sites, or outrage stories with headlines for clicks, stop incentivizing that behaviour. Just ban all politics/news and let people talk about other stuff.

Because people want to use social media, and they're going to keep doing it. And people talk about news. They're still going to talk about it with friends and family. Except, instead of at least linking to an article, now they'll have to share it via selected bits and pieces that FB can't censor (or via pure interpretation).

Perhaps there could be an unintended consequence that people will need to put some more effort into "sharing news" (i.e. writing or copying some words in order to begin a discussion)?

By having multiple origin sources for the story (rather than one widely shared post from an outlet) it might reduce the popularity bias of "everyone else liked that, I should too"?

Changing user behaviour is hard, but part of me wonders if this could be a really interesting experiment to see if it brings about any meaningful change on social media.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#73

Post by extropy »

worik wrote: post #58

Can anybody explain to me what the problem is with Facebook et el driving traffic to news sites? Most of the times I visit newspapers websites I was sent there from social media.

Australia thinks they can extract value from news aggregators.

There is the argument that showing news snippets next to the link is what you bare paying for. But otherwise it's a pure media money grab backed by the government.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#74

Post by bawolff »

DevKoala wrote: post #40
pantsforbirds wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook showed in their release the monetary value of they provided the news companies. I can't see how you could possible argue they do not provide value to the classic media companies by allowing them to be linked and discussed freely on their feeds.

Facebook can say a lot of things, but I bet the publishers also have their own numbers and they are the ones who pushed for this deal.

Traditional media companies have been cutting off their noses to spite their faces for a long time now. I dont see why this will be any different.

Besides, this is obviously a good deal if facebook folds. Publishers seem to be overestimating their position so fb is calling their bluff. Both sides have stuff to lose, but im pretty sure the publishers have a lot more than fb does.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#75

Post by cmrdporcupine »

quink wrote: post #16
cowpig wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh my god this is a real thing... https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/07/australian-pm-calls-en...

> Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second rate people who share its luck. It lives on other people's ideas, and, although its ordinary people are adaptable, most of its leaders (in all fields) so lack curiosity about the events that surround them that they are often taken by surprise. - Donald Horne, 1964

I think this describes other commonwealth countries, like here in Canada, as well. Likely an outcrop of former-colonial mentality. The history of leadership here when we still had a mother country was one of governorship and colonial administration. The towns and streets are named after them. Frankly the attitude towards politics has persisted. It has its positives (stability and a relative lack of dysfunction) and its problems.

In Ontario as well we have this kind of problem with state-capture by industries all over. Regulations and land zoning are in many ways geared for the already-haves rather than a level playing field. An example being the wine industry regulation here.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#76

Post by justapassenger »

bwb wrote: post #50
bpodgursky wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This will just ensure that all news is transmitted via memes, screenshots, and unsourced copy-pasted quotes. It won't be an improvement.

Why wouldn't people just visit news sites like normal? You go to cnn.com or nytimes.com or your local newspaper. Thats it, just don't allow it at FB. People post so many fake stories from fakes sites, or outrage stories with headlines for clicks, stop incentivizing that behaviour. Just ban all politics/news and let people talk about other stuff.

> You go to cnn.com [...] "outrage stories with headlines for clicks, stop incentivizing that behaviour"

CNN is one of the example of news organization that lives on outrage. There's not that many news sites left that avoid clickbaity headlines and fueling outrage. Social media helped to advance that, but it's not now - cable news and just their websites discovered that it works before social media.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#77

Post by offby37years »

nostromo wrote: post #59
clouddrover wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the Australian government misunderstanding? They wanted a better deal for domestic news media, they are getting a better deal for domestic news media: https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/google-nine-agree-... https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56101859 The Australian government's approach is working.

This is how regulatory capture happens. Google can afford to pay for the right to link to publishers. New startups can't. Australia has strengthened Google's monopoly, all in the guise of "taking on" big tech.

Where does it stipulate this law applies to new startups?

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#78

Post by tw04 »

Oh no, not that, anything but that.

In all seriousness I hope this drives the less informed in Australia to seek out actual news sources and break out of the echo chamber that is Facebook. And I hope it forces Facebook to actually support journalism instead of leeching off of it. You can't have a robust democracy without a robust fourth estate.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#79

Post by tt433 »

CydeWeys wrote: post #71
anonymousab wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could have blocked Google and Facebook at any time. They didn't because they know the value is important if not existential. What they want is for Facebook and Google to be forced to list them, but also forced to pay for the privilege. If they failed to craft or pay for legislation to that end, it was nothing more than a mistake.

> What they want is for Facebook and Google to be forced to list them, but also forced to pay for the privilege. If they failed to craft or pay for legislation to that end, it was nothing more than a mistake. Such legislation is impossible given that Google/Facebook are not Australian companies. At the end of the day, if the legislation makes their involvement in those countries a net negative for their bottom lines,…

I'm not really sure what you mean by impossible

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#80

Post by JamisonM »

evolve2k wrote: post #55
endisneigh wrote: post #15

Could someone summarize both positions? It seems pretty reasonable to me - my understanding is that Australia wants Google and Facebook to pay lump sums to have their content on their platforms (as opposed to per-click). Google and Facebook can basically say yes or no. How is this different than, say, The New York Times saying the same thing about their content?

The Australian Government for ages has been trying to get the news organisations and the social media giants to come together and establish a voluntary media code that addresses concerns of multiple parties in a reasonable way. I’m sure each of you will be shocked to hear that Google & FB each have been hostile to the process form the start and have missed meetings and general behaved poorly and arrogantly in their d…

There are a lot of comments in here slamming the Australian government for somehow "not understanding the Internet" or whatever and I thank you for this detailed background.

There are good and bad sides to this law and this situation, I personally commend Australia for /at the very least/ running this experiment for the rest of the world that probably doesn't have much downside and might very well lead to some real collaboration, changes and/or innovations going forward. At least they are giving something a try.

Post reply on HN