Re: the Aus news ban on Facebook

[mabunch78]

TBF, they followed through...

[Thomas]

They kinda pressed the button a little too hard and blocked state government health pages, Bureau of Meteorology page and countless other non-news sites.

They even smashed the satirical Betoota Advocate.

[Slim 293]

It’s at least provided them with some good fodder...

Report: Not A Bad Day For Someone Trying To Duck Questions About His Staff Committing Rape.

https://m.betootaadvocate.com/uncategor ... ting-rape/

[Olo]

I won’t miss it. It was was mostly bad news.

[mabunch78]

They kinda pressed the button a little too hard and blocked state government health pages, Bureau of Meteorology page and countless other non-news sites.

They even smashed the satirical Betoota Advocate.

Whether they like it or not, they have a responsibility not only to "connecting people" but also to that portion of the online economy that sprang up under their ecosystem, which effectively facilitated the revenue streams they had been promising their own investors for so many years before they went public.

They've shown a few times recently that they should be put over someone's knee and given five of the best with the trusty regulation belt...

[Bindi]

Whilst this was purely done to appease big Rupret, the outcome is quite nice.

[guy smiley]

Whilst this was purely done to appease big Rupret, the outcome is quite nice.

I’m in the boat with those who find it hilarious.

[kiap]

Whilst this was purely done to appease big Rupret, the outcome is quite nice.

Got a feeling this sort of model will spread to some more countries.

I’m in the boat with those who find it hilarious.

It is pretty funny.

Possibly not for the reason you think, though.

[sorCrer]

Facebook has a detrimental affect on society. I say this as a 25 year internet veteran who has written many Facebook apps and made a lot of money off Facebook. I deleted my account a few years back and never looked back.

[grievous]

The man child Zuckers threw his dody out of his pram.
Those that have their lives dominated by this "site" will have issues.
Organisations that have it as their window to the world will realise they shouldnt of.
Great outcome.

[Pat the Ex Mat]

Facebook has a detrimental affect on society. I say this as a 25 year internet veteran who has written many Facebook apps and made a lot of money off Facebook. I deleted my account a few years back and never looked back.

Stop being such an old fart

[Winnie]

Facebook has a detrimental affect on society. I say this as a 25 year internet veteran who has written many Facebook apps and made a lot of money off Facebook. I deleted my account a few years back and never looked back.

Stop being such an old fart

To be fair he is right
What has Facebook done positive for society?
What has it done that is negative?

The cons far out way the pros

[guy smiley]

Facebook has a detrimental affect on society. I say this as a 25 year internet veteran who has written many Facebook apps and made a lot of money off Facebook. I deleted my account a few years back and never looked back.

Stop being such an old fart

To be fair he is right
What has Facebook done positive for society?
What has it done that is negative?

The cons far out way the pros

It’s certainly contributed to the dramatic decline in standards related to spelling and grammar.

[Muttonbirds]

Scumo getting a taste of his own medicine, arrogance.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/436705 ... k-arrogant

[Winnie]

Facebook has a detrimental affect on society. I say this as a 25 year internet veteran who has written many Facebook apps and made a lot of money off Facebook. I deleted my account a few years back and never looked back.

Stop being such an old fart

To be fair he is right
What has Facebook done positive for society?
What has it done that is negative?

The cons far out way the pros

It’s certainly contributed to the dramatic decline in standards related to spelling and grammar.

Cool story bro

[grievous]

Scumo getting a taste of his own medicine, arrogance.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/436705 ... k-arrogant

why do you cares about so much?

[Muttonbirds]

Scumo getting a taste of his own medicine, arrogance.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/436705 ... k-arrogant

why do you cares about so much?

You've not read my posts over the last few days?

[eldanielfire]

I won’t miss it. It was was mostly bad news.

IMO the bigger the separation between social media and news the better. Social media has utterly degraded the quality and honestly of news over the past decade.

[grievous]

Scumo getting a taste of his own medicine, arrogance.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/436705 ... k-arrogant

why do you cares about so much?

You've not read my posts over the last few days?

Was one of them about burning someone?

[Muttonbirds]

Scumo getting a taste of his own medicine, arrogance.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/436705 ... k-arrogant

why do you cares about so much?

You've not read my posts over the last few days?

Was one of them about burning someone?

Go have a look.

[grievous]

Scumo getting a taste of his own medicine, arrogance.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/436705 ... k-arrogant

why do you cares about so much?

You've not read my posts over the last few days?

Was one of them about burning someone?

Go have a look.

yeah nah

[guy smiley]

I won’t miss it. It was was mostly bad news.

IMO the bigger the separation between social media and news the better. Social media has utterly degraded the quality and honestly of news over the past decade.

I don’t agree with that. You’re scapegoating social media for the drop in standards across an industry that practically self regulates. A drive in pursuing clickbait style headlines accompanied by populist editorial policy has resulted in appalling standards in journalism... social media as a vehicle has helped drive that as a platform, but the fall in standards has not been caused by social media in itself. It’s been caused by the pursuit of profit, sales vs quality and the insidious influence of Rupert f**king Murdoch and his empire.

[jambanja]

Scumo getting a taste of his own medicine, arrogance.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/436705 ... k-arrogant

why do you cares about so much?

You've not read my posts over the last few days?

Was one of them about burning someone?

Go have a look.

We did and turns out the answer is yes, shame on you

[grievous]

I won’t miss it. It was was mostly bad news.

IMO the bigger the separation between social media and news the better. Social media has utterly degraded the quality and honestly of news over the past decade.

I don’t agree with that. You’re scapegoating social media for the drop in standards across an industry that practically self regulates. A drive in pursuing clickbait style headlines accompanied by populist editorial policy has resulted in appalling standards in journalism... social media as a vehicle has helped drive that as a platform, but the fall in standards has not been caused by social media in itself. It’s been caused by the pursuit of profit, sales vs quality and the insidious influence of Rupert f**king Murdoch and his empire.

But Zuckerburg is interested in editorial integrity and journalistic standards? Not about the bucks?:lol:

[guy smiley]

I won’t miss it. It was was mostly bad news.

IMO the bigger the separation between social media and news the better. Social media has utterly degraded the quality and honestly of news over the past decade.

I don’t agree with that. You’re scapegoating social media for the drop in standards across an industry that practically self regulates. A drive in pursuing clickbait style headlines accompanied by populist editorial policy has resulted in appalling standards in journalism... social media as a vehicle has helped drive that as a platform, but the fall in standards has not been caused by social media in itself. It’s been caused by the pursuit of profit, sales vs quality and the insidious influence of Rupert f**king Murdoch and his empire.

But Zuckerburg is interested in editorial integrity and journalistic standards? Not about the bucks?:lol:

Fascinating, Grievy.

What’s your point here, mate?

[Petej]

Facebook has a detrimental affect on society. I say this as a 25 year internet veteran who has written many Facebook apps and made a lot of money off Facebook. I deleted my account a few years back and never looked back.

Same for twitter as well. Absolutely populated with bots and trolls pushing extremes. Though the media being shit and dominated by the whims of oligarchs isn't helping. Making it less accessible is a plus as it distorts our view of humanity.

[eldanielfire]

I won’t miss it. It was was mostly bad news.

IMO the bigger the separation between social media and news the better. Social media has utterly degraded the quality and honestly of news over the past decade.

I don’t agree with that. You’re scapegoating social media for the drop in standards across an industry that practically self regulates. A drive in pursuing clickbait style headlines accompanied by populist editorial policy has resulted in appalling standards in journalism... social media as a vehicle has helped drive that as a platform, but the fall in standards has not been caused by social media in itself. It’s been caused by the pursuit of profit, sales vs quality and the insidious influence of Rupert f**king Murdoch and his empire.

So you don't agree with it but then you point out how social media does exactly as I said it does.

I'm not just blaming social media exclusively nor have I claimed it's the singular cause of the culture bad journalism. I've brought up the toxic clickbaity style of journalism as well and criticised Murdoch's toxic influence on news many times on this board. However this is a topic on social media and the news.

Social media certainly exacerbated the trends by allowing journalists not needs to do journalism these days as well as the creation of bubbles, especially at the political extremes where people aren't exposed to uncomfortable truths, or even valid truths and have their own political prejudices reinforced daily rather than being informed. In the Uk these issues are at least mitigated and softened by our regulators for TV news. Unlike the US.

However we seem to have more journalists whose research is looking at social media trends (which only reflect a small segment of society) rather than actually going out and looking for the truth. For that social media has amplified a bad problem massively.

[Pat the Ex Mat]

Facebook has a detrimental affect on society. I say this as a 25 year internet veteran who has written many Facebook apps and made a lot of money off Facebook. I deleted my account a few years back and never looked back.

Stop being such an old fart

To be fair he is right
What has Facebook done positive for society?
What has it done that is negative?

The cons far out way the pros

I can see you're a man of nuance

[grievous]

I won’t miss it. It was was mostly bad news.

IMO the bigger the separation between social media and news the better. Social media has utterly degraded the quality and honestly of news over the past decade.

I don’t agree with that. You’re scapegoating social media for the drop in standards across an industry that practically self regulates. A drive in pursuing clickbait style headlines accompanied by populist editorial policy has resulted in appalling standards in journalism... social media as a vehicle has helped drive that as a platform, but the fall in standards has not been caused by social media in itself. It’s been caused by the pursuit of profit, sales vs quality and the insidious influence of Rupert f**king Murdoch and his empire.

But Zuckerburg is interested in editorial integrity and journalistic standards? Not about the bucks?:lol:

Fascinating, Grievy.

What’s your point here, mate?

Ill type slowly, you say Murdoch dumbs down news sites but your beloved Face book doesn't with a bit of unchecked extremist material thrown in.

[guy smiley]

I’ll type slower for you...

Facebook doesn’t provide content for those sites. Facebook carries their content.

We all know there’s dodgy content online including on Facebook and that Facebook’s profit is derived from sources other than simply carrying content...

but they don’t determine the actual content they carry, Grievy. You knew this, right?

[Sputnik V]

FB is crap. I can go weeks without even logging in and when I do it is for mins.

[grievous]

I’ll type slower for you...

Facebook doesn’t provide content for those sites. Facebook carries their content.

We all know there’s dodgy content online including on Facebook and that Facebook’s profit is derived from sources other than simply carrying content...

but they don’t determine the actual content they carry, Grievy. You knew this, right?

Why have you shifted the subject, you were screaming at Murdoch several posts ago, hes stuffed up the news websites you said, hes greedy you said, what has Zuckerburg done to maintain standards or regulate better than those websites?
Switch off in a huff it would seem.
Enjoy the animal photos and stalking friends from herein on your platform.

[guy smiley]

I’ll type slower for you...

Facebook doesn’t provide content for those sites. Facebook carries their content.

We all know there’s dodgy content online including on Facebook and that Facebook’s profit is derived from sources other than simply carrying content...

but they don’t determine the actual content they carry, Grievy. You knew this, right?

Why have you shifted the subject, you were screaming at Murdoch several posts ago, hes stuffed up the news websites you said, hes greedy you said, what has Zuckerburg done to maintain standards or regulate better than those websites?
Switch off in a huff it would seem.
Enjoy the animal photos and stalking friends from herein on your platform.

I haven’t shifted the subject. I’m engaging you in conversation. Well, I was until you...

shifted the subject.

[grievous]

I’ll type slower for you...

Facebook doesn’t provide content for those sites. Facebook carries their content.

We all know there’s dodgy content online including on Facebook and that Facebook’s profit is derived from sources other than simply carrying content...

but they don’t determine the actual content they carry, Grievy. You knew this, right?

Why have you shifted the subject, you were screaming at Murdoch several posts ago, hes stuffed up the news websites you said, hes greedy you said, what has Zuckerburg done to maintain standards or regulate better than those websites?
Switch off in a huff it would seem.
Enjoy the animal photos and stalking friends from herein on your platform.

I haven’t shifted the subject. I’m engaging you in conversation. Well, I was until you...

shifted the subject.

About five responses with no original content, its like you are Facebook.

[guy smiley]

You don’t really know what’s going on do you, Grievy...

you’re like a little white lab rat in the middle of a maze, whiskers twitching while you sniff the air, unsure of where to go.

[Ali's Choice]

This is how 'news' has been defined for the purposes of this law;

[grievous]

You don’t really know what’s going on do you, Grievy...

you’re like a little white lab rat in the middle of a maze, whiskers twitching while you sniff the air, unsure of where to go.

Your usual revert when you have nothing, pulling on the arrogant know all routine. I wouldn't be calling anyone else little

[Flyin Ryan]

I’ll type slower for you...

Facebook doesn’t provide content for those sites. Facebook carries their content.

We all know there’s dodgy content online including on Facebook and that Facebook’s profit is derived from sources other than simply carrying content...

but they don’t determine the actual content they carry, Grievy. You knew this, right?

You could've made this argument say four months ago. But Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. actively choosing to not carry certain content, you can't make this argument now. It's hardly only subjugated to the fringes of society either when Twitter blocked the New York Post's Twitter account for a period of time.

Right now I can tell you from being a county political party chair Facebook has a ban on political ads.

[bimboman]

I’ll type slower for you...

Facebook doesn’t provide content for those sites. Facebook carries their content.

We all know there’s dodgy content online including on Facebook and that Facebook’s profit is derived from sources other than simply carrying content...

but they don’t determine the actual content they carry, Grievy. You knew this, right?

You could've made this argument say four months ago. But Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. actively choosing to not carry certain content, you can't make this argument now. It's hardly only subjugated to the fringes of society either when Twitter blocked the New York Post's Twitter account for a period of time.

Right now I can tell you from being a county political party chair Facebook has a ban on political ads.

Zing. And spot on.

[Mog The Almighty]

I don't know why anyone gives a shit.

Who gets their news from Facebook anyway? The Australian Government and media corporations are just mad that they can't charge them.

F-ck 'em. Keep the news of Facebook. Good, it will be a huge improvement. The Social Dilemma was scary!

Besides, Facebook is a private foreign company. Alleged economic free market liberals should respect that.