387
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by avidamoeba@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca

We appear to be standing our ground!

Not my preferred choice of source but NatPo has more detail than some of the alternatives I saw. It includes some numbers as well as comments about the difference between Meta's and Google's approaches. Hint: they're not the same, so there's already cracks in the effort to make an example out of Canada.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] AlternateRoute@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 year ago

Remember when companies had to PAY to get listed in the phone book, pay for for being discovered with ads?

WTF should google PAY news companies for posting links to them?

I can absolutely see good reason to have to pay for "content" such as images and summaries that may lower the number of clicks through to the news paper, but having to pay for every link is just absurd and as much as I have no love for FB or Google they are doing what is reasonable from their point of view.

https://www.davidgraham.ca/p/an-interim-proposal-for-media-subscriptions

https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2023/07/amac18/

[-] mymanchris@lemmy.ca 28 points 1 year ago

I strongly recommend the book "The Four" by Scott Galloway. He does an excellent job of breaking down how the Four Horsemen (Amazon, Google, Apple and Facebook) destroy regional competition by leveraging their power as content gateways yet constantly skirt regulations that apply to broadcasters. Their cries of "we're not a broadcaster, we're just an aggregator" ring hollow when their algorithms determine what articles & headlines people see and they have shaped public opinion on various topics (e.g. elections, supreme court decisions, labour negotiations, public demonstrations, etc). He outlines how Google outmaneuvered the NYT and became the defacto gateway to all journalistic content because they were able to freely link to content created by others, while still putting an editorial spin on stories through their aggregation (eg should the story talking about "BLM protestors" appear before or in place of the story about "counter-racism demonstators" (narrator: they are the same story).

[-] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

skirt regulations that apply to broadcasters.

In fairness, they are probably more like newspapers, which are also not subject to broadcasting laws. In fact, I was reading through some newspaper archives (early 1900s) the other day. The newspapers contained pages upon pages of:

"Mr. and Mrs. James Smith hosted friends from the next town over this past weekend. A good time was had by all."

It turns out Facebook was invented centuries ago.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
387 points (99.5% liked)

Canada

7188 readers
328 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


๐Ÿ Meta


๐Ÿ—บ๏ธ Provinces / Territories


๐Ÿ™๏ธ Cities / Local Communities


๐Ÿ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


๐Ÿ’ป Universities


๐Ÿ’ต Finance / Shopping


๐Ÿ—ฃ๏ธ Politics


๐Ÿ Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS