Australian Posters, what is this Yahoo search bullshit? Have Google gone Nuclear?

[kiap]

Kiap, since you have been by far the biggest supporter of this media bill on this forum, can you please explain how FB blocking all Australian news sites is a positive outcome for our news organisations?

It's probably a small negative - by that, I mean ...

... for both Facebook itself and content providers in the short term.

News content at less than 4% of what's shared there is a vacancy that will be soon swallowed up elsewhere. And of course it's content for which the providers weren't getting their dime...

So when content does now appear there'll be more dues flowing back.

Good news

[Farva]

Facebook will capitulate, or lose market share in Australia.
Cant really see what else will happen. We as consumers will adapt and something else will enter the market and take its place. Facebook will lose by doing this, and I dont really feel sorry for them.
They make money by showing us other peoples news.
Having said that I also dont have a huge amount of sympathy for the online news companies that have whacked on paywalls for what is effectively tabloid news. I dont think they are sustainable businesses. I do think that the likes of Google and Facebook have made it harder for these agencies to make money without a paywall, as they pinch the ad revenue generated by the news articles.
Finally Facebook has very much pushed the culture war that our friends over in that thread love banging on about. They have filtered news sites so you only see opinions that agree with you, and news agencies have responded by going more extreme. Id love to see something come in that stops that.

[Ali's Choice]

Kiap, since you have been by far the biggest supporter of this media bill on this forum, can you please explain how FB blocking all Australian news sites is a positive outcome for our news organisations?

It's probably a small negative - by that, I mean ...

... for both Facebook itself and content providers in the short term.

News content at less than 4% of what's shared there is a vacancy that will be soon swallowed up elsewhere. And of course it's content for which the providers weren't getting their dime...

So when content does now appear there'll be more dues flowing back.

Good news

When you say providers "weren't getting their dime..." you're not suggesting that there is no way providers were able monetise visits to their site?

[kiwigreg369]

Why don’t you go direct to their site?
I really don’t understand this hysteria from GS and AC...

I'm not being hysterical. I'm simply asking Kiap and others who passionately advocated for this new media bill how Facebook banning access to Australian news content is a positive outcome for our news organisations. Morrison promised us that this bill would save Australian news, but I'm struggling to see how that's going to happen.

Why are google doing deals then?
That’s more money direct to the content providers.
There’s your answer

[kiwigreg369]

Australian news pages goooooooooooooooone from Facebook...

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... ws-content

Betoota Advocate’s page is empty

A great victory, of course, for the Australian govt and those who support this legislation. No more free linking to news outlets.

Fantastic. Great job. Well done.

Damn, that's the only Australian news source I read.

Why don’t you go direct to their site?
I really don’t understand this hysteria from GS and AC...

Yes, hysteria...

I outlined my sentiments about this above Greg. For all its evils, FB has become a sort of one stop shop for media outlets. Mass exposure mate... you can understand the appeal of that, yeah? A feed that allows your site the capacity to have a personalised page that links to all your business, for free.

You seem to have moved on from news - similar to your comment to Pat. There are other news aggregators out there - use them.

If businesses were gaining from Facebook then I’m sure Facebook have a model (not free) that supports them. But it was never ‘free’ - the cost is that Facebook drew the click revenue.

[kiwigreg369]

Facebook will capitulate, or lose market share in Australia.
Cant really see what else will happen. We as consumers will adapt and something else will enter the market and take its place. Facebook will lose by doing this, and I dont really feel sorry for them.
They make money by showing us other peoples news.
Having said that I also dont have a huge amount of sympathy for the online news companies that have whacked on paywalls for what is effectively tabloid news. I dont think they are sustainable businesses. I do think that the likes of Google and Facebook have made it harder for these agencies to make money without a paywall, as they pinch the ad revenue generated by the news articles.
Finally Facebook has very much pushed the culture war that our friends over in that thread love banging on about. They have filtered news sites so you only see opinions that agree with you, and news agencies have responded by going more extreme. Id love to see something come in that stops that.

+1

[kiap]

When you say providers "weren't getting their dime..." you're not suggesting that there is no way providers were able monetise visits to their site?

Not enough. They're better off where the middleman pays.

I ask it this way ... Did Zvcker just say, fvcker, there's no money for me in news so I can't afford to pay?

The answer is, yes.

And yet pulling out is going to cost him.

You hate to see it...

[Sensible Stephen]

I am shocked at the number of people who use Facebook for news, or anything actually. Grandpas. You old fellas need to get hip with the internet jive.

[jambanja]

Doubling down...

on what?
Have you ever bought a newspaper? Do you know how or does it get in the way of Facebook feed telling you what to wear that day?

Has Mick hacked grievy’s account?

Youre such a child.
Leave you 3 to circle jerk on each others faces.
Enjoy

Your’re

umm...

[Pat the Ex Mat]

I am shocked at the number of people who use Facebook for news, or anything actually. Grandpas. You old fellas need to get hip with the internet jive.

Yep!

Mind you, it's interesting to see how FB's algorithm is working to keep up - lots of posts from groups I'm a member of I haven't seen for ages.

And I use FB Purity

[Enzedder]

It was interesting when Stuff milked clicks via Facebook for all it could get. Their news content was diabolical and aimed at the lowest common denominator.

Since they abandoned Facebook (and their Aussie owners) they have returned to being a readable news site and I have left a few monetary donations as a thank you.

[kiap]

I am shocked at the number of people who use Facebook for news, or anything actually. Grandpas. You old fellas need to get hip with the internet jive.

Yep!

Mind you, it's interesting to see how FB's algorithm is working to keep up - lots of posts from groups I'm a member of I haven't seen for ages.

And I use FB Purity

I had an account with zero activity on it that I must've created 15 years ago to view something at the time.

I think FB just locked it about 10 years ago since it didn't have a real authenticated name.

Yo and behold, I get an e-mail this morning. An out of the blue "friend" request.

[Pat the Ex Mat]

I am shocked at the number of people who use Facebook for news, or anything actually. Grandpas. You old fellas need to get hip with the internet jive.

Yep!

Mind you, it's interesting to see how FB's algorithm is working to keep up - lots of posts from groups I'm a member of I haven't seen for ages.

And I use FB Purity

I had an account with zero activity on it that I must've created 15 years ago to view something at the time.

I think FB just locked it about 10 years ago since it didn't have a real authenticated name.

Yo and behold, I get an e-mail this morning. An out of the blue "friend" request.

Load balancing will be interesting in the farms

[Ali's Choice]

Given the squeals of indignation across all the major Australian news sites this morning, I don't think this is the positive outcome that Kiap is saying it is. The major Australian news sites were all expecting Facebook to fund them for eternity, but that's not looking so likely after this morning's events.

[kiap]

I don't think this is the positive outcome that Kiap is saying it is.

I said it was a small negative.

[Slim 293]

All of the state government health pages were also initially wiped, but have now been reinstated...

There is an upside - the Reignite Democracy Australia page... f**king goooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooone!

[Ali's Choice]

I don't think this is the positive outcome that Kiap is saying it is.

I said it was a small negative.

That's this morning. But you have been joyously supporting this legislation for months, promoting it at every opportunity knowing full well that today's outcome was very likely.

Facebook blocking all news related content was the outcome you have been advocating for. Unless you were so stupid that you thought Facebook would fund our failing news organisations until the end of time without putting up a fight?

[kiap]

I don't think this is the positive outcome that Kiap is saying it is.

I said it was a small negative.

That's this morning. But you have been joyously supporting this legislation for months, promoting it at every opportunity knowing full well that today's outcome was very likely.

Facebook blocking all news related content was the outcome you have been advocating for. Unless you were so stupid that you thought Facebook would fund our failing news organisations until the end of time without putting up a fight?

LOL. It's negative for Facebook. Of course they'll 'ave a go, m8.

It's a small negative for news content providers, re FB, but they'll still be nett better off.

All positive for me.

[Ali's Choice]

I don't think this is the positive outcome that Kiap is saying it is.

I said it was a small negative.

That's this morning. But you have been joyously supporting this legislation for months, promoting it at every opportunity knowing full well that today's outcome was very likely.

Facebook blocking all news related content was the outcome you have been advocating for. Unless you were so stupid that you thought Facebook would fund our failing news organisations until the end of time without putting up a fight?

LOL. It's negative for Facebook. Of course they'll 'ave a go, m8.

It's a small negative for news content providers, re FB, but they'll still be nett better off.

All positive for me.

Sorry, you're saying it's a "small negative" but they'll simultaneously be better off?

[guy smiley]

on what?
Have you ever bought a newspaper? Do you know how or does it get in the way of Facebook feed telling you what to wear that day?

Has Mick hacked grievy’s account?

Youre such a child.
Leave you 3 to circle jerk on each others faces.
Enjoy

Your’re

umm...

Need some help, Jammy?

[MungoMan]

I am shocked at the number of people who use Facebook for news, or anything actually. Grandpas. You old fellas need to get hip with the internet jive.

I’m grandpa but must be doing faecesbook wrong. I can barely recall ever reading a news item from an fb link.

Admittedly, I don’t use it often and rarely post so that might have something to do with it...

[Ali's Choice]

I suspect there would be a number of people across Australia who are paid to manage the facebook pages of news sites, who are potentially out of a job today?

[jambanja]

Has Mick hacked grievy’s account?

Youre such a child.
Leave you 3 to circle jerk on each others faces.
Enjoy

Your’re

umm...

Need some help, Jammy?

Maybe it's an Aussie thing

[guy smiley]

Maybe you just don’t understand satire?

[kiap]

Sorry, you're saying it's a "small negative" but they'll simultaneously be better off?

Yes, since content providers have the prospect of being more fairly paid.

F'rinstance, an organisation representing just 2% of the top 20 news websites by viewership recently inked an agreement with google for $30+ million a year - to be plugged into news journalism.

Anyway, much as I charitably provide you with a free education in these matters, some peeps in this country have to do actual work to prop up all the public servants.

It's time to say adieu.

[kiwigreg369]

I suspect there would be a number of people across Australia who are paid to manage the facebook pages of news sites, who are potentially out of a job today?

Is that a question or a statement? I question if you really suspect.

I suspect that the absence of Facebook means that there will have to be more investment by organisations in fee charging platforms or bespoke platforms. Which means the demand and jobs for these people just increased.

That’s the collation I guess - thinking about the worker and pursuing job creation policies

[Ellafan]

Australian news pages goooooooooooooooone from Facebook...

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... ws-content

Betoota Advocate’s page is empty

A great victory, of course, for the Australian govt and those who support this legislation. No more free linking to news outlets.

Fantastic. Great job. Well done.

Damn, that's the only Australian news source I read.

I got all my usual news from FB 5 minutes ago (i.e., none). Don't sign in.

[jambanja]

Maybe you just don’t understand satire?

That's what it'll be

[koroke hangareka]

Facebook will capitulate, or lose market share in Australia.
Cant really see what else will happen. We as consumers will adapt and something else will enter the market and take its place. Facebook will lose by doing this, and I dont really feel sorry for them.
They make money by showing us other peoples news.
Having said that I also dont have a huge amount of sympathy for the online news companies that have whacked on paywalls for what is effectively tabloid news. I dont think they are sustainable businesses. I do think that the likes of Google and Facebook have made it harder for these agencies to make money without a paywall, as they pinch the ad revenue generated by the news articles.
Finally Facebook has very much pushed the culture war that our friends over in that thread love banging on about. They have filtered news sites so you only see opinions that agree with you, and news agencies have responded by going more extreme. Id love to see something come in that stops that.

Good to see a genuinely interesting post among all the strutting and posturing

[Sensible Stephen]

Finally Facebook has very much pushed the culture war that our friends over in that thread love banging on about. They have filtered news sites so you only see opinions that agree with you, and news agencies have responded by going more extreme. Id love to see something come in that stops that.

Probably deserves a separate thread, but this is a huge problem. Youtube as well. Creates more and more divided, extreme camps of people.

[Slim 293]

While much of the focus on this discussion has been on the larger media companies, it should be noted that Facebook’s blanket ban on anything supplying any semblance of news has shut down a significant number of smaller publications, including those that promote local industries, such as Broadsheet which supports hospitality and retail...

These companies rely heavily on Facebook for their audience, and now they’re a tad f**ked.

[jambanja]

While much of the focus on this discussion has been on the larger media companies, it should be noted that Facebook’s blanket ban on anything supplying any semblance of news has shut down a significant number of smaller publications that promotes local industries, such as Broadsheet which supports hospitality and retail, that rely heavily on Facebook for their audience...

It has also shut down emergency sites, health sites etc oh and worst of all the Harvey Norman site is unavailable

https://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/soci ... epartments

[Ellafan]

While much of the focus on this discussion has been on the larger media companies, it should be noted that Facebook’s blanket ban on anything supplying any semblance of news has shut down a significant number of smaller publications, including those that promote local industries, such as Broadsheet which supports hospitality and retail...

These companies rely heavily on Facebook for their audience, and now they’re a tad f**ked.

If they have an audience, they can have a website for their own content and sell advertising on it. An 11 year old kid can set up a website.

[freddie111]

The simple answer to your question is that google's usefulness is based on it linking copyrighted material including news, images, and the like to attract hits. The linking includes excerpts of the written pieces, image reproductions and the like. It is using the hit rates to sell advertising*. This is a breach of IP (copyright) laws - economic exploitation of someone elses' expression of information (or images) for monetary gain, without permission. Additionally, they are collecting your online history data, and using it to earn profit.

*Personally, I use Adguard to block the adds, and Avast security's tracker blocking to maintain control of my data.

Sorry for the delay in responding but what you are saying is wrong wrt Google's search ad revenue. Google doesn't make money from news in search. Its strategy is to drive traffic to news publishers for free. The publishers theb have Google ads. In this way both Google and the news publisher make money.
I'd like to understand how this is exploitative.
(Bar using your browser history to show you relevant ads or relevant free news headlines)

There is also a newish area of Google News where subscriptions can be set up and shared across paywalls. I believe that that is an area that Google is hoping to grow but it's still pretty small, revenue-wise.

Wrt the recent Australia news deal it's hard to judge how much is commercially viable long term and how much is a payoff considering the worldwide regulation implications so its hard to judge those.

[Slim 293]

While much of the focus on this discussion has been on the larger media companies, it should be noted that Facebook’s blanket ban on anything supplying any semblance of news has shut down a significant number of smaller publications, including those that promote local industries, such as Broadsheet which supports hospitality and retail...

These companies rely heavily on Facebook for their audience, and now they’re a tad f**ked.

If they have an audience, they can have a website for their own content and sell advertising on it. An 11 year old kid can set up a website.

Er, they do have their own content and websites...

Boomers and new media.

[Ellafan]

The simple answer to your question is that google's usefulness is based on it linking copyrighted material including news, images, and the like to attract hits. The linking includes excerpts of the written pieces, image reproductions and the like. It is using the hit rates to sell advertising*. This is a breach of IP (copyright) laws - economic exploitation of someone elses' expression of information (or images) for monetary gain, without permission. Additionally, they are collecting your online history data, and using it to earn profit.

*Personally, I use Adguard to block the adds, and Avast security's tracker blocking to maintain control of my data.

Sorry for the delay in responding but what you are saying is wrong wrt Google's search ad revenue. Google doesn't make money from news in search. Its strategy is to drive traffic to news publishers for free. The publishers theb have Google ads. In this way both Google and the news publisher make money.
I'd like to understand how this is exploitative.
(Bar using your browser history to show you relevant ads or relevant free news headlines)

There is also a newish area of Google News where subscriptions can be set up and shared across paywalls. I believe that that is an area that Google is hoping to grow but it's still pretty small, revenue-wise.

Wrt the recent Australia news deal it's hard to judge how much is commercially viable long term and how much is a payoff considering the worldwide regulation implications so its hard to judge those.

You' sound like a paid google spruiker.

Google is breaching IP laws in this country. It connects other people's IP to its search page result to attract users, sell advertising and make money - for google. Bullshit spin like your canned message quoted above isn't fooling anyone. The only pro-google posters on this thread are ideologues who are emotionally obsessed with hating Newscorp.

[jdogscoop]

Anyone else find this mildly hilarious?

Facebook shows a decent sized pair of balls.

[Ellafan]

While much of the focus on this discussion has been on the larger media companies, it should be noted that Facebook’s blanket ban on anything supplying any semblance of news has shut down a significant number of smaller publications, including those that promote local industries, such as Broadsheet which supports hospitality and retail...

These companies rely heavily on Facebook for their audience, and now they’re a tad f**ked.

If they have an audience, they can have a website for their own content and sell advertising on it. An 11 year old kid can set up a website.

Er, they do have their own content and websites...

Boomers and new media.

Good, you can bookmark their site and subscribe to their email newsletter then.

We boomers invented the fucking internet, Slim, and the money that developed it to where it is today mostly came from online porn and gambling.

[freddie111]

The simple answer to your question is that google's usefulness is based on it linking copyrighted material including news, images, and the like to attract hits. The linking includes excerpts of the written pieces, image reproductions and the like. It is using the hit rates to sell advertising*. This is a breach of IP (copyright) laws - economic exploitation of someone elses' expression of information (or images) for monetary gain, without permission. Additionally, they are collecting your online history data, and using it to earn profit.

*Personally, I use Adguard to block the adds, and Avast security's tracker blocking to maintain control of my data.

Sorry for the delay in responding but what you are saying is wrong wrt Google's search ad revenue. Google doesn't make money from news in search. Its strategy is to drive traffic to news publishers for free. The publishers theb have Google ads. In this way both Google and the news publisher make money.
I'd like to understand how this is exploitative.
(Bar using your browser history to show you relevant ads or relevant free news headlines)

There is also a newish area of Google News where subscriptions can be set up and shared across paywalls. I believe that that is an area that Google is hoping to grow but it's still pretty small, revenue-wise.

Wrt the recent Australia news deal it's hard to judge how much is commercially viable long term and how much is a payoff considering the worldwide regulation implications so its hard to judge those.

You' sound like a paid google spruiker.

Google is breaching IP laws in this country. It connects other people's IP to its search page result to attract users, sell advertising and make money - for google. Bullshit spin like your canned message quoted above isn't fooling anyone. The only pro-google posters on this thread are ideologues who are emotionally obsessed with hating Newscorp.

Wow, you may want to lie down and have lemsip.

I dont give a flying fúck about Newscorp in Australia, you seem to have mw confused with someone else.

Happy to own up to any bullshit in my post. The only IP I see Google using is a headline and an image and then a free link to the publisher. No money involved in that part. There may be the odd ad but I think its extremely rare as for news people want to read the article not just the headline. (This is quite different to Facebook, a social media platform, where the content is shared in some form larger than a headline directly on Facebook.com).
If you have anything to show that's not the case then please do share.

[Ellafan]

freddie111
Posts: 137
Joined: 31 Jan 2012 10:05

Fuck off Anon.