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

Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–98 of 98 posts

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

#91

Post by PrimeMcFly »

prepend wrote: post #5
hirundo wrote: post #4

Where is Google News on this? Searching for "fire yellowknife" I see for example links to articles from the Toronto Star, CBC and Calgary Herald. Is Google paying for the privilege of displaying those links?

That’s just as stupid as Canada trying to force Facebook to pay news companies because users were sharing articles with each other. We’re in a “stupid, arbitrary rule” situation and users are finding workarounds. Canada’s law seems dumb to me. Yes, news companies make less money because of Facebook, but it’s users communicating. Should the postal service pay the newspapers if people start mailing people letters with…

What I don't get is why they caved and agreed to it in Australia but are standing up against Canada.

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

#92

Post by beej71 »

frumper wrote: post #88
dbingham wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has a monopoly on certain forms of connection and communication. You could easily say the same thing about telephone companies, that it was "absurd" that they had a monopoly on communication - after all, people communicate in many other ways beyond the telephone: mail, face to face, telegram, and so forth. But we still treated the telephone companies as having a monopoly on a critical form of communication. And we…

Having a lot of users doesn’t make one a monopoly. Having the only way to communicate makes you a monopoly. People can type in www.cnn.com and get their news just fine.

This. I don't use Facebook at all and have tons of other pathways for communications.

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

#93

Post by paulmd »

kennywinker wrote: post #85
catchnear4321 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it’s not rent seeking for the original creator to sell content direct to a consumer. if you wish to carry this further from the initial point, you do so without me.

> it’s not rent seeking for the original creator to sell content direct to a consumer. So it’s rent seeking for the original creator to post it for free and sell ads against it? And what’s with this “original creator” language? Does that only apply to the author, or can the company that paid the author to create it sell it without being rent-seekers? My point is: you called fb and news producers both rent seekers, an…

Profiting from content production is obviously not rent seeking, but this is currently coupled to content distribution which is absolutely rent-seeking. You’re charging money for something that costs nothing to distribute, what else would it be? That’s a rent absolutely.

It is a rent that secures the production aspect, but we could also have patronage models that fund the creation separately. If your game is kickstarted or you get a monthly donation to produce a video there is no need to profit from creating artificial scarcity in the distribution.

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

#94

Post by gremlinunderway »

entuno wrote: 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.

Jesus christ, can you suck the corporate teet any harder here?

God forbid a corporate entity can't just run amok in a country and do whatever it wants.

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

#95

Post by prepend »

kennywinker wrote: post #90
prepend wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The postal service sells stamps. They already make money off every letter sent. Does it matter if it’s a stamp or a junk mail flyer?

It matters to me if my mailbox is full of junkmail instead of letters from friends. Idk what point you’re trying to make, but at issue here is that journalism is being starved to death by sites like facebook that suck up all the profits and attention but don’t provide any of the service that journalism provided. That’s bad for canadians. This law may be the wrong way to fix this problem, but to talk about rules and p…

> journalism is being starved to death by sites like facebook

No, journalism is being starved by digital peer to peer communication. Facebook is the thing. People being able to say “hey, did you see this?” instead of needing to read a newspaper.

And of course, the real problem is that newspapers sold their own ads that no one cares about any more (classified).

I think newspapers dying is a problem and would like them not to. But taxing or forcing Facebook to do something is not a solution and it won’t affect the future of newspapers.

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

#96

Post by [deleted] »

davikr wrote: post #7

Good, this is a consequence of pure rent-seeking lobbying from big newspapers. > There have been 52 registered meetings with Ministers, MPs, and senior officials or roughly one meeting every four days since election day nearly 8 months ago. This represents an astonishing level of access and may help explain why the concerns of independent media and the broader public are missing from the bill. [1] [1]: https://www.mi…

[deleted]

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

#98

Post by [deleted] »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #56
victorbjorklund wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN