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

The European Union backs Italy's right to make Meta pay for news

niemanlab.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 101 posts

Re: The European Union backs Italy's right to make Meta pay for news

#81

Post by buellerbueller »

abigail95 wrote: post #31
buellerbueller wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you send traffic to some e-commerce platform through an affiliate link, you are the one who gets paid. These companies are instead trying to rig the system in such a way that the affiliate would be forced to pay them. It's an absurd and desperate proposal that deserves to be rejected. This isn't what is happening. People read the summarized headline/article on meta's turf and then don't go to the source article.…

Should HN links be compensated on a percentage of non-click-throughs? There are people who just come for the comments. Would you support this law being universal and not only applied to Meta/news?

HN links are not article summaries, so your question is not apt.

Re: The European Union backs Italy's right to make Meta pay for news

#82

Post by nitwit005 »

buellerbueller wrote: post #11
forestingfisher wrote: post #2

Does this mean HN will have to pay for all the links too? Tired of this overregulation

Meta doesn't have to pay for the links. It's the summaries. I suspect the publishers would welcome the links, as they'd drive traffic and ad revenue. Instead, Meta is siphoning the revenue by summarizing the content.

While they cite the summaries as copyright infringement, news organizations have previously rejected removing them as a way to resolve things. They ultimately want money.

Meta's fix has been to try to walk away from the news. They removed the news tab in some regions.

Re: The European Union backs Italy's right to make Meta pay for news

#83

Post by nitwit005 »

einszwei wrote: post #27
rick_dalton wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada passed a similar bill a few years ago causing meta to stop showing Canadian news content on their platforms. It didn’t really impact them financially or user wise. So the same thing will probably happen in Italy.

Canadian news might've been easier to replace with American news outlets due to the deep ties between the two and the shared language. I doubt this would be the case for Italian news.

They also removed the news tab in the US. The news organizations seem dependent on social media, but the reverse does not appear true.

Re: The European Union backs Italy's right to make Meta pay for news

#84

Post by gruez »

anigbrowl wrote: post #77
gruez wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don't think it's the demographics that have changed, but the state of the internet, and the awareness that big tech's stranglehold over our media is a problem. The less charitable interpretation is that interest groups are just harnessing the current kneejerk reaction for anything anti-"big tech" to serve their own interests. See also: people being theoretically in favor of affordable housing, but are also against…

Why not just build affordable housing instead of luxury condos, you're creating a weird false equivalence.

Because in practice that just means nothing gets built at all. It's like having a food shortage but not wanting to buy/grow more food unless it's fair trade, organic, permaculture certified, non-gmo, certified kosher/halal, and cruelty free. All of those are laudable goals, but if the combined effect is that nothing gets done, that's counterproductive.

Re: The European Union backs Italy's right to make Meta pay for news

#85

Post by keeganpoppen »

neksn wrote: post #33

The demographics of this site have changed so much that people here are applauding… that it is now illegal to embed opengraph information on Facebook? This is deranged. And it only happens because the government is in bed with legacy media. The government being in bed with the media is awful for the common person. Embedding opengraph data is a clear case of fair use, and it’s sad to see all of this coming from a comm…

yeah somehow it is a minority opinion to shout “this is obviously stupid” from the rooftops… i guess meta has gone from startup to … utility(?) over the course of the last decade, but i have yet to see anything in this equivalence class of decision that isn’t just obviously idiotic… gl to italy, i guess. wish them all the best.

Re: The European Union backs Italy's right to make Meta pay for news

#87

Post by keeganpoppen »

ksec wrote: post #57
neksn wrote: post #33

The demographics of this site have changed so much that people here are applauding… that it is now illegal to embed opengraph information on Facebook? This is deranged. And it only happens because the government is in bed with legacy media. The government being in bed with the media is awful for the common person. Embedding opengraph data is a clear case of fair use, and it’s sad to see all of this coming from a comm…

>The demographics of this site have changed so much that people here are applauding I don't think it has. Meta has been pretty much hated on HN since the beginning. And has only gotten worse and peaked during 2020. It is not about linking information, it is about Facebook.

nah facebook definitely was not hated on since the beginning… if you mean “meta” specifically, then yes, i actually agree. kinda like a “prince turning his name into a symbol” jump-discontinuous moment that marked the changing of the tides.

Re: The European Union backs Italy's right to make Meta pay for news

#88

Post by anigbrowl »

gruez wrote: post #84
anigbrowl wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just build affordable housing instead of luxury condos, you're creating a weird false equivalence.

Because in practice that just means nothing gets built at all. It's like having a food shortage but not wanting to buy/grow more food unless it's fair trade, organic, permaculture certified, non-gmo, certified kosher/halal, and cruelty free. All of those are laudable goals, but if the combined effect is that nothing gets done, that's counterproductive.

That's just another false equivalent. People want affordable housing. Luxury condos are clearly Not That. Your food analogy is backwards. You're actually saying that people want affordable food, but object to building more luxury restaurants, so that nobody gets fed at all.

Re: The European Union backs Italy's right to make Meta pay for news

#89

Post by halostatue »

rick_dalton wrote: post #17
iso1631 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do they show Italian news before? Because it makes them money.

Canada passed a similar bill a few years ago causing meta to stop showing Canadian news content on their platforms. It didn’t really impact them financially or user wise. So the same thing will probably happen in Italy.

Frankly, the Canadian government needs to come down on them for the misleading and untruthful message that they post when Facebook censors news links.

It is past time that American companies are restrained from acting like boorish American tourists in other countries.

Re: The European Union backs Italy's right to make Meta pay for news

#90

Post by gruez »

anigbrowl wrote: post #88
gruez wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because in practice that just means nothing gets built at all. It's like having a food shortage but not wanting to buy/grow more food unless it's fair trade, organic, permaculture certified, non-gmo, certified kosher/halal, and cruelty free. All of those are laudable goals, but if the combined effect is that nothing gets done, that's counterproductive.

That's just another false equivalent. People want affordable housing. Luxury condos are clearly Not That. Your food analogy is backwards. You're actually saying that people want affordable food, but object to building more luxury restaurants, so that nobody gets fed at all.

>People want affordable housing. Luxury condos are clearly Not That

Luxury condos increase supply, driving down the price of all housing. It's economics 101.

>You're actually saying that people want affordable food, but object to building more luxury restaurants, so that nobody gets fed at all.

The point is that all the stipulations people have on top eg. "organic" makes it harder to create more supply.

Post reply on HN