Canada to follow Australia's lead in taxing Facebook for news links, gov't says they won't be intimidated by Facebook's threats

[PocketNerd]

Well, so much for the "information super-highway"

[CarlBar]

7 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

If you link to an article without paying those who did the work, you should be taxed to ensure that the money does go to them. Otherwise, we're just letting FOX, CNN, Facebook, and Twitter drain the coffers of independent journalists. Give credit to the studio that put their money into investigating stories and events. 

 

Even when it's the new services that are posting the links and not Facebook? Because thats moronic as far as i'm concerned.

 

 

As others have said, this will just hurt more than help the news services. Remember this only applies to news services based in said countries. Stop and think about that for a second. Any tom, dick, or harry can go setup their own news company with an official registered base in some country without these laws, and then provide said links to the internet giants free of charge. When their regular internet places still have news reports, just not from big national names, your going to see those big national names stop being big names anymore because people won't go to them anymore. At which point the big internet giants are in the same place they where before the laws and the news services are worse off, (if they still exist), than they where before the law.

[ARikozuM]

3 hours ago, CarlBar said:

Even when it's the new services that are posting the links and not Facebook? Because thats moronic as far as i'm concerned.

If the websites themselves post on FB, that's one thing. They still make revenue from it. Other websites, like ours, should lead some ad revenue to the source. They put the work in and should make money off of their work. If they aren't getting paid, that's a problem and will only lead to further issues like the Oregonian and Bradenton Herald that regurgitates whatever some wealthy owner wants said.

[robigan]

On 2/19/2021 at 1:11 PM, Stahlmann said:

I still don't really get it. Why should google pay news sites to have their links come up in the search results? Google is the reason for the majority of their traffic to begin with. Could google not just blacklist news sites so they don't come up? Can someone explain to me why this would make any sense? Sounds to me like the news sites "biting the hand that's feeing them".

Dunno if some1 already replied in the same way as I. But they cannot blacklist news sites bc the legislations prevent that. Saying that they cannot blacklist news sites and cannot prioritize news companies from outside the country

[NumLock21]

People actually go to facebook for news and not directly to news sites itself?

[TopKitty]

On 2/19/2021 at 4:11 AM, Stahlmann said:

I still don't really get it. Why should google pay news sites to have their links come up in the search results? Google is the reason for the majority of their traffic to begin with. Could google not just blacklist news sites so they don't come up? Can someone explain to me why this would make any sense? Sounds to me like the news sites "biting the hand that's feeing them".

I agree that the value should flow from the publisher to the provider of views, but the main issue is that the general public is stuck inside the big websites and don’t venture out to read from other websites by entering their url or using bookmarks thus getting rid of the middleman that’s taking a chunk of the ad cash and or subscription opportunity.

 

[Lurick]

On 2/21/2021 at 9:18 AM, TopKitty said:

I agree that the value should flow from the publisher to the provider of views, but the main issue is that the general public is stuck inside the big websites and don’t venture out to read from other websites by entering their url or using bookmarks thus getting rid of the middleman that’s taking a chunk of the ad cash and or subscription opportunity.

 

Following Facebook's blocking Australian news links the Australian news sites saw traffic skyrocket by double digits. More information here:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210220/23410646285/australian-news-sites-shocked-upset-to-learn-they-dont-need-to-rely-facebook-traffic.shtml

[Totallycasual]

I honestly thought this whole thing was just part of an overall strategy to try and force them into paying some taxes, they make a truckload of money from countries that they don't give a cent to

[ARikozuM]

On 2/20/2021 at 4:08 PM, NumLock21 said:

People actually go to facebook for news and not directly to news sites itself?

Do you click on all of the source materials in our own TN subforum? Do you think the majority do? The minority? This is tackling a bigger issue more closely resembling plagiarism. Facebook, Google, et al, should be paying this tax directly to the publisher, but instead we have to force them through legislation.

[Jools G]

(I live in Australia, and have been pasting this on many Australia politicians Fb pages)
"
If you were "google/Facebook" and a friend
ask about Cafes and you then listed a few

Should you? (as google/facebook) pay the coffee shops for that suggestion

but only pay the cafes owned by Rupert murdoch (initially) and not the other smaller owed cafes
or not the one owned by us "ABC" (Australian National Broadcaster)

That's what Prime Minister Scott Morrison is asking google to do

With the French news vs google agreement,
the "News snippet"
similar with the now google "News Showcase"

that's fair, because its like taste testing at each coffee shop
 

Many news sites have paywall's (that's one of their income stream $)
Its up to the people, if the site and articles are worth paying for.
 

I still think google/FB should pay real business Tax
not Tax haven money shuffle loophole peanuts

Which is something this (Australian) Government can do,
since they write the tax laws.


and a Jeff Javis youtube video saying similar