A flame comment post has been removed.

 

 TikTok will fill the space, in its quest for world domination...

3 hours ago, mfd101 said:

You obviously haven't read today's news in Australia.

Actually I had been reading it up until noon and there was only wishy washy stuff from the Government. Give me an hour and I will check.

9 hours ago, donnacha said:

A private agreement between one massive corporation and another, the details of which have not been revealed and are unlikely to involve any actual cash renumeration, probably mostly cross-promotional stuff.

What has that got to do with an attempt to create a law that forces websites to pay to link to other websites, breaking one of the primary conventions upon which the open Web was built?
 

Sure won't be the $600m annually that Murdoch wanted!

4 hours ago, mfd101 said:

You obviously haven't read today's news in Australia.

Just looked at the ABC & SMH and there is nothing there except looking for someone to help them. You must not have enjoyed the acid tongue of Keating. It would go on for 30 minutes if a journalist wrote something he disagreed with. Can you imagine an American taking that abuse.

9 hours ago, donnacha said:

I am no fan of Facebook but it is not arrogance to chose to stop using something that you don't consider to be worth paying for.

Local media owners, aghast at their diminishing influence and failing business models in an online world where they no longer have a de facto monopoly on the dissemination of information, pressure the government to pressure Facebook into paying for linking to their content in users' news feeds.

Facebook says "Well, that makes no financial sense for us, so, in a world awash with interesting free content, we'll simply drop the content you think we should be paying to link to".

As was entirely predictable, the traffic to the local media owners' sites disappears, their advertising revenue disappears, and now they feel that aggrieved that Facebook decided not to be mugged.

This is the sort of cr@p that the French try to pull, I'm surprised that the Australian government did not realise that this would happen.

 

"I'm surprised that the Australian government did not realise that this would happen."....As we all know, when Murdoch tells the Au government to jump, they do. Murdoch got legislation to ban android units as his rotten Foxtel was failing... modems had to be modified not to enable the use of.....then came the $40m gift from Australia...now he's again persuaded further legislation against the "theft" of news.....most sites they have are paywalled and people again are abandoning.

4 minutes ago, ChrisY1 said:

"I'm surprised that the Australian government did not realise that this would happen."....As we all know, when Murdoch tells the Au government to jump, they do. Murdoch got legislation to ban android units as his rotten Foxtel was failing... modems had to be modified not to enable the use of.....then came the $40m gift from Australia...now he's again persuaded further legislation against the "theft" of news.....most sites they have are paywalled and people again are abandoning.

Murdoch is yesterday's news.

The start of the Ossie Government's money grab to make up for lack of lobster, coal, iron ore sales etc, along with Chinese import duties decline on imported items that the population are saying they no longer want to buy.& will pay double for the locally made item.

Regardless of your good intentions it just will not work

Well, I’m with Facebook on that one. Greedy news outlets want to be paid, Facebook doesn’t play along and now they try to make out Facebook as the bad guy. Pathetic!

 

Also, who the hell relies on Facebook to get their news?! 
 

They’re acting like Australians are completely in the dark about what’s going on in their country during COVID and the bushfire season! What about radio, TV and all the news outlets’ websites?! 
 

Get a grip! 

8 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

Also, who the hell relies on Facebook to get their news?! 

To be fair, it’s one of the last reasons why I’m keeping my Facebook account. I don’t post selfies or like anything; I purely keep it to (1) keep in touch with people in case their phone/Email changes, and (2) read through my news stream.
 

My second source for news is Google News.

 

Both blend articles from different sources, which is more convenient than visiting different news pages one after another. I’ve tried RSS feed readers but they all lack the AI and only merge articles chronologically. The only single newspaper that I keep visiting as a stand-alone site is one of my home country that I read since I was a teenager. 

19 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

Well, I’m with Facebook on that one. Greedy news outlets want to be paid, Facebook doesn’t play along and now they try to make out Facebook as the bad guy. Pathetic!

 

Also, who the hell relies on Facebook to get their news?! 
 

They’re acting like Australians are completely in the dark about what’s going on in their country during COVID and the bushfire season! What about radio, TV and all the news outlets’ websites?! 
 

Get a grip! 

Then stick with Facebook if you need friends that much.

our most reliable online news service might actually now be from sites such as TV!!  

otherwise google search for all the original webpages that used to be accsssible via the fbk links; while they are still searchable on Google etc...   pages such as 'Sky News Australia' Direct still gives us our Alan Jones  daily fixes ???? 

They maybe so-called 'lightweights' running the country but at least Josh Frydenburg (the Treasurer) ain't gonna take it lying down.

The Facebook's of this world should be brought into line.  They have so much power, do the wrong thing and claim to be the 'victim'...

much like Communist China..   nobody is game to stand up to them.  Good on Frydenburg for having a go.

They rake in millions of bucks from advertising they use with the news they steal from Australian media corps. and sources yet only pay about 3% tax.

I'm sure other countries are watching with interest!

 

    

6 hours ago, GreasyFingers said:

 

 

6 hours ago, pacovl46 said:

Well, I’m with Facebook on that one. Greedy news outlets want to be paid, Facebook doesn’t play along and now they try to make out Facebook as the bad guy. Pathetic!

At least the (so-called) greedy news outlets pay their fair share of taxes!!!!!!!!!!!!

6 hours ago, pacovl46 said:

Well, I’m with Facebook on that one. Greedy news outlets want to be paid, Facebook doesn’t play along and now they try to make out Facebook as the bad guy. Pathetic!

 

Also, who the hell relies on Facebook to get their news?! 
 

They’re acting like Australians are completely in the dark about what’s going on in their country during COVID and the bushfire season! What about radio, TV and all the news outlets’ websites?! 
 

Get a grip! 

Between Facebook and Murdoch, my heart can't make up its  mind! ????

23 minutes ago, bangkok19 said:

At least the (so-called) greedy news outlets pay their fair share of taxes!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Dream on.

 

Tax dodging News Corp continues to rip Australia off — and is subsidised by taxpayers to do so

 

News Corp retains its crown as a champion tax rorter, yet again paying next to nothing in tax despite billions in revenue.

 

https://www.crikey.com.au/2020/12/11/news-corp-tax-dodging/

 

Nothing new, and not confined to the one dynasty. Packer was just as bad.

 

After a seven-year legal battle, Australia's richest man, Kerry Packer, won a Federal Court ruling absolving him of paying any personal income tax for the three-year period 1990-92. Packer, who owns Australian Consolidated Press and runs a media and gambling casino empire, has a personal fortune of over $A5 billion. Last financial year, he made an average of $3.56 million per day.

 

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1998/10/tax-o15.html

 

Although I do still love Packer's reply at an inquiry (although morally bankrupt, still comes down to governments closing loopholes):

 

 

20 hours ago, donnacha said:

A private agreement between one massive corporation and another, the details of which have not been revealed and are unlikely to involve any actual cash renumeration, probably mostly cross-promotional stuff.

What has that got to do with an attempt to create a law that forces websites to pay to link to other websites, breaking one of the primary conventions upon which the open Web was built?
 

Since when are 'open web" content providers legally excluded from paying for news content? The decision by Facebook is a shot in the foot as it defines the company as a publisher because they are are curating content. In any case Facebook publishing news content provides a degree of 'stickiness' from which they generate advertising revenue  i.e. Facebook are cannibalising news content provider revenue. Accordingly it's fair Facebook should be paying for news content.

12 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Accordingly it's fair Facebook should be paying for news content.

 

So is TV (and the millions of other sites) going to pay for the news content it republishes?

1 minute ago, Salerno said:

 

So is TV (and the millions of other sites) going to pay for the news content it republishes?

 

Think you will find TV has agreement from Reuters, The Nation and other feeds they publish.

1 minute ago, simple1 said:

Think you will find TV has agreement from Reuters, The Nation and other feeds they publish.

 

So that would be a no then. 

12 minutes ago, Salerno said:

 

So that would be a no then. 

Please don't put words in the mouth. No idea actual T&Cs commercial arrangements TV has in-place other than 'agreement'. Have to wait and see if government enact and enforce payment for content sourced  by social media platforms from commercial organisations e.g. news organisations - makes sense to me. Google has proactively agreed to commercial arrangement in Australia for news content. 

22 hours ago, PatOngo said:

OMG!!! Can people still post photo's of what they had for breakfast???

AND what it becomes when they're done with it. ????

6 hours ago, bangkok19 said:

At least the (so-called) greedy news outlets pay their fair share of taxes!!!!!!!!!!!!

The result of posting before you've read the entire thread..... nevermind. It is what it is!!!

 

Tax dodging News Corp continues to rip Australia off — and is subsidised by taxpayers to do so.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/feb/17/rupert-murdoch-receives-882m-tax-rebate

 

News Corp retains its crown as a champion tax rorter, yet again paying next to nothing in tax despite billions in revenue.

https://www.crikey.com.au/2020/12/11/news-corp-tax-dodging/#:~:text=It is foreign-owned%2C Rupert,pays no tax in Australia.

maybe Josh F can somehow get suckerberg up on some Count like 'anti-trust'...   or whatever it takes to put him on the Stand to explain himself publicly 

3 hours ago, UncleMhee said:

Tax dodging News Corp continues to rip Australia off —

Yes..it's hard to feel any sympathy-let alone engagement-in these two media giants "shadow boxing" their way with their faux expressions of outrage and tendentious statements that it is all to the good of truth,justice and the Australian way..

 

Sure..'tis a negotiating position only.

22 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

To be fair, it’s one of the last reasons why I’m keeping my Facebook account. I don’t post selfies or like anything; I purely keep it to (1) keep in touch with people in case their phone/Email changes, and (2) read through my news stream.
 

My second source for news is Google News.

 

Both blend articles from different sources, which is more convenient than visiting different news pages one after another. I’ve tried RSS feed readers but they all lack the AI and only merge articles chronologically. The only single newspaper that I keep visiting as a stand-alone site is one of my home country that I read since I was a teenager. 

Fair enough! 

16 hours ago, bangkok19 said:

 

At least the (so-called) greedy news outlets pay their fair share of taxes!!!!!!!!!!!!

Facebook does pay taxes in Australia! 

22 hours ago, GreasyFingers said:

Then stick with Facebook if you need friends that much.

What a stupid statement! 

25 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

What a stupid statement! 

Too close to home, was it?