World News closed: Entertainment News still open.

[Tug]

A sad end for me it was a place to blow off steam in this troubled time stay safe blessings to all I’ll still be around 

[2530Ubon]

13 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

Indeed.

 

As I asked in the OP: "If ThaiVisa management no longer wanted to pay for World News content, why could the forum not have been left open for members to post free content and comments on same?"

 

I think it's because then TVF could be sued for sharing news stories and not paying for the content. There's no such thing as 'free' content. Journalists & news publishers work for money, and no-one is going to let you copy and paste their work for free. 

[tgw]

5 hours ago, Jingthing said:

No! Reuters is as neutral as it can get.  

Reuters - Media Bias Fact Check

 

well, I disagree with their assessment.

I had been a long time user of Reuters before.

 

I agree with "factual reporting", yet how to rate things that go unreported?

Also, there is the issue of really "covering both sides" - my feeling is that it was more thoroughly done before.

 

I pointed out twice on ThaiVisa news reporting biaised against Trump - something that is confirmed on the Media Bias Fact Check page.

[polpott]

Just now, tgw said:

 

well, I disagree with their assessment.

I had been a long time user of Reuters before.

Would that be pre Trump? Trump supporters dislike Reuters intensly for their annoying habit of printing the truth, or as Trump supporters would call it, "fake news".

[tgw]

4 minutes ago, polpott said:

Would that be pre Trump? Trump supporters dislike Reuters intensly for their annoying habit of printing the truth, or as Trump supporters would call it, "fake news".

 

still in the nineties! lol

and yes, Reuters has reported in a biaised way against Trump, this is confirmed here:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/reuters/

 

but Trump really isn't that interesting - my point is that Western news are increasingly blind about what happens in the rest of the world, and balanced reporting, i.e. reporting on all sides of a story, has become rare.

 

"Global perspective" is something they hardly provide anymore.

 

Many journalists also predominantly report on stuff that is relatively easy to research and which won't get them into too much trouble.

Social rights, racism, minorities, poverty, women's rights, etc...

I'm not saying that these don't have merit and shouldn't be reported on, but I miss pieces on geopolitics, economic trends, industry reports, etc.

 

[polpott]

Just now, tgw said:

but Trump really isn't that interesting - my point is that Western news are increasingly blind about what happens in the rest of the world, and balanced reporting, i.e. reporting on all sides of a story, has become rare.

AKA truth vs. lies. I would prefer to be told the truth only.

[Jingthing]

5 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Who checks the Media Bias checkers?

 

Dems would rate CNN as unbiased, as Repubs would rate Fox as unbiased.  They'd both be wrong, of course- as would the organizations they put in front of us posing as unbiased arbiters. 

 

What's the bias of this particular bias checker?

 

No.

You're wrong.

Pretty much everyone would rate CNN and Fox as biased.

Only extremists would find significant bias in Reuters.

Nice try. No cigar.

[7by7]

12 hours ago, meechai said:

Yeah right because gawd knows folks flock to Thai Visa for World News

I certainly didn't join TVF for the world news, and I doubt that many did.

 

However, the forum was popular; whilst some topics had less than 1000 views, many had tens of thousands. Did this popularity not generate revenue?

 

12 hours ago, meechai said:

No...This is the classic sky is falling forum whine when someone doesn't get their way...

Suddenly it is .....doesn't the forum know it will fold without "me" or the "Feature I want"

From the replies here it seems that more people share my view than yours. So I guess the question is; should the management provide the type of forum the members want? After all, if it doesn't people will go elsewhere. The less traffic the forum receives, the lower the revenue. 

 

12 hours ago, meechai said:

1- This is a THAILAND Forum it should be Thai specific

So you think they should also get rid of all forums not directly related to Thailand?

 

That is most of them! How, for example, is Entertainment news. The latest showbiz, celebrity and entertainment news from around the world" or  "In Your Face! Have your say on popular trending topics currently in the world. Quirky, fun, interesting." 

 

There's the Regional Forums covering countries in S.E. Asia other than Thailand. Should they go?

 

13 hours ago, meechai said:

2- Folks looking for "world" news have many forums to choose from as well as news websites

Indeed, but I'm a member here and enjoyed the banter and discussions with other members; including those with whom I disagreed.

 

Although we don't pay directly, we are this sites customers in the same way that a commercial TV station's viewers are it's customers. No business ever made money by telling it's customers to go elsewhere!

 

13 hours ago, meechai said:

3- World News on Thai Visa has over the years just become a giant soapbox for the usual suspects to blame/whine/cry

over this & that in countries they usually no longer live in

 

Good Idea to shut it down Thai Visa ???? Agree 101%

 

OK, you didn't care for it nor the discussions therein. But it was popular. Should the forum be run solely for your benefit?

[7by7]

11 hours ago, 2530Ubon said:

 

I think it's because then TVF could be sued for sharing news stories and not paying for the content. There's no such thing as 'free' content. Journalists & news publishers work for money, and no-one is going to let you copy and paste their work for free. 

 

Scoop.me 

Quote

Republish for free

Scoop.me offers media and authors all over the world the opportunity to republish the content shared on Scoop.me free of charge – both for print and online. The articles can either be translated or republished in the original language.

(I have no connection to them, I am merely using them as an example. Other sites offering the same or a similar service exist.)

[impulse]

11 hours ago, polpott said:

more people using some form of ad blocker due to the insane layout of ads

 

Winner winner, chicken dinner.  I didn't mind seeing some ads.  In fact, some of them were genuinely interesting and useful.  But the ad layouts often made the site totally unreadable, and lasted that way for weeks on end. 

 

Maybe they've fixed those issues, but who wants to be the guinea pig to find out?

[Scott]

12 hours ago, 2530Ubon said:

 

I think it's because then TVF could be sued for sharing news stories and not paying for the content. There's no such thing as 'free' content. Journalists & news publishers work for money, and no-one is going to let you copy and paste their work for free. 

Thaivisa paid for the news it posted.   That is the reason that full articles were posted.  

[polpott]

Just now, Scott said:

Thaivisa paid for the news it posted.   That is the reason that full articles were posted.  

And is that the reason it is now blocked?

[Scott]

56 minutes ago, polpott said:

And is that the reason it is now blocked?

I believe the providers that Thaivisa was using have raised their prices considerably.   So, I would say that is the primary reason.  Mods and Admin were not given a great deal of insight into the reasoning.  

 

[Cryingdick]

2 hours ago, 7by7 said:

I certainly didn't join TVF for the world news, and I doubt that many did.

 

However, the forum was popular; whilst some topics had less than 1000 views, many had tens of thousands. Did this popularity not generate revenue?

 

From the replies here it seems that more people share my view than yours. So I guess the question is; should the management provide the type of forum the members want? After all, if it doesn't people will go elsewhere. The less traffic the forum receives, the lower the revenue. 

 

So you think they should also get rid of all forums not directly related to Thailand?

 

That is most of them! How, for example, is Entertainment news. The latest showbiz, celebrity and entertainment news from around the world" or  "In Your Face! Have your say on popular trending topics currently in the world. Quirky, fun, interesting." 

 

There's the Regional Forums covering countries in S.E. Asia other than Thailand. Should they go?

 

Indeed, but I'm a member here and enjoyed the banter and discussions with other members; including those with whom I disagreed.

 

Although we don't pay directly, we are this sites customers in the same way that a commercial TV station's viewers are it's customers. No business ever made money by telling it's customers to go elsewhere!

 

 

OK, you didn't care for it nor the discussions therein. But it was popular. Should the forum be run solely for your benefit?

 

You have this mistaken. The advertisers are the customers. The users of TV are the product. In this sense it’s why TV will never go out of it’s way to please the users. 

 

TV will have trouble because the target demographic is an older crowd that doesn’t want the FB sort of vibe. Many users here think that TV isn’t actually a social media site. So there is limited innovation in regards to messengers, posting pics and memes is discouraged, they hate you linking things, it’s simply way too asynchronous for the times it lives in.

 

In order for Tv to live another decade they need young people to join. Young people don’t tend to gravitate towards walls of black and white text they prefer animated colorful rich multi-media platforms. 

 

 

 

 

[katana]

As a temporary measure at least, couldn't TV just take World news stories from the BBC news website, posting just the headline and first couple of sentences with a link to avoid copyright infringement?

[vinny41]

3 hours ago, katana said:

As a temporary measure at least, couldn't TV just take World news stories from the BBC news website, posting just the headline and first couple of sentences with a link to avoid copyright infringement?

Why the BBC there are many reports on the internet where the BBC has been accused of being bias in its reporting

[vinny41]

I think the concern about the forum finances among some members is a red herring, however if there is a genuine concern about the forum  finances and their revenue streams why not start a poll to examine how many members would pay for a 2 tier forum via a subscription service, assuming that the owner of TV wants to implement such a service and that the forum software can supported a paid for access News feed forum while the rest of the forum remains free.

Personally I don't think there isn't enough support from members that would be willing to pay for access to a International News feed subscription service

[Jingthing]

26 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Why the BBC there are many reports on the internet where the BBC has been accused of being bias in its reporting

Yes. Definitely not as neutral as Reuters.

 

You searched for BBC - Media Bias Fact Check

Quote

LEFT-CENTER BIAS These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. 

 

[Jingthing]

16 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

I think the concern about the forum finances among some members is a red herring, however if there is a genuine concern about the forum  finances and their revenue streams why not start a poll to examine how many members would pay for a 2 tier forum via a subscription service, assuming that the owner of TV wants to implement such a service and that the forum software can supported a paid for access News feed forum while the rest of the forum remains free.

Personally I don't think there isn't enough support from members that would be willing to pay for access to a International News feed subscription service

Obviously,  members won't pay for a world news feed. Everyone can get similar for free. 

[katana]

58 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Why the BBC there are many reports on the internet where the BBC has been accused of being bias in its reporting

Well, it was just a suggestion of a news website whose storys could be quoted and might allow for the TV News section to return.
As to its bias, I agree with you, but that wasn't really the point.

[nkg]

6 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Winner winner, chicken dinner.  I didn't mind seeing some ads.  In fact, some of them were genuinely interesting and useful.  But the ad layouts often made the site totally unreadable, and lasted that way for weeks on end. 

 

Maybe they've fixed those issues, but who wants to be the guinea pig to find out?

 

 

Correct. I deliberately switched my ad blocker off "to support Thaivisa". But a bug with the adverts (pages shaking up and down while I was trying to read them) meant that I turned it back on again.

 

Sort out the problems, announce that you've done it, and I'll happily switch off my adblocker permanently.

 

[Jingthing]

Just now, katana said:

Well, it was just a suggestion of a news website whose storys could be quoted and might allow for the TV News section to return.
As to its bias, I agree with you, but that wasn't really the point.

Yeah I get your point in that.

I'm going to assume that the site doesn't want to present as a Cheap Charlie "stealing" those stories from any particular source, even with just links. Or perhaps it wouldn't even be completely legal for a commercial business to use in that way. So it was either fully legit or nothing. 

[CharlieH]

Some off topic/responses/conspiracy nonsense, and a post discussing Moderation have been removed.

[Kerryd]

I recall back when George was still running things and TV started running ads. (Some people think that sites like TV are "free" and there are no operating costs involved with providing all this content. You know, like internet connections/bandwidth/servers/tech support.)

Paid memberships were suggested back then, with "paid" members not having any ads while "free" members would still see them everywhere.

The idea never got a lot of traction if I recall. I think the ads weren't as "intrusive" back then as well. (Change "intrusive" for "annoying".)

And advertising revenue is (usually) based on "page clicks" - not on the number of "new" or "old" users. The more "clicks" a page gets, the more revenue it will generate (although it takes a lot of clicks to make any noticeable difference).

An "old" user that visits a page 100 times in a week and makes a post each time would be worth far more than 20 "new users" who visit once and make a single post (or none at all). The system doesn't differentiate between how many clicks are generated by "new" or "old" users. 

I read a whack of "World News" every day from a number of sources but in truth, I think in the 15+ years I've been on TV, I've probably gone to the World News forum maybe once or twice.
I visit TV primarily for news/info about Thailand. There's a couple of forums I visit regularly and many that I've never looked at, at all. I have probably visited the Entertainment forum more often than I have the World News and Farang Pub combined.

And if you've been following world news lately (from whatever sources) you may have noticed that some countries are trying to force sites like Facebook to pay for any "news" articles posted on their platform. Once they have done it to one platform, you can be sure the media generators (i.e. the newspapers and places like the BBC/Reuters/AP/Al Jazeera and others) will go after other sites, starting with the big ones and working their way down.

Newspapers actually tried to do this many, many years ago, long before Facebook in fact. I recall in the early days of the internet, when people were still using dial up modems, many newspapers wanted to start charging people every time they clicked on a page (like a penny every time you clicked on a page on their site). 

Didn't work out for them (as I think they were expecting the ISPs to collect the revenue for them and that was a non-starter). Plus, how were they expecting to charge a ""penny a click" to people who visit their site once or twice a week and look at a single article.
I think they floated the idea of subscriptions as well without much luck.

Simply too many places on the net to get the same info for free.

However, don't feel too sorry for the media companies. They generate ad revenue off their own media sites and in some cases, also get gov't subsidies (aka "bribes") to help them remain "competitive".
Any revenue they get from Google/Facebook/ThaiVisa will probably just go to covering the bonuses for the top execs.

[polpott]

4 hours ago, nkg said:

 

 

Correct. I deliberately switched my ad blocker off "to support Thaivisa". But a bug with the adverts (pages shaking up and down while I was trying to read them) meant that I turned it back on again.

 

Sort out the problems, announce that you've done it, and I'll happily switch off my adblocker permanently.

 

Personally I think that TV will go down the route of other online forums during these Covid times. Banner ads plastered everywhere asking members to donate to the forum.

[vinny41]

Same rules should apply for both free forums and any paid for forum,

two people go into a bank a non-customer of that bank and a customer of that bank,

Would the bank allow any of the above customers to shout and make insults to the staff or would they both be asked to leave and make their business elsewhere

 

[CharlieH]

If people persist in making comments on moderation this will be closed.

[Jingthing]

Speaking as a former high volume poster on the now defunct world news forum I have these observations.

 

The majority of the topics were USA centric.

 

That attracted a core of Americans and non Americans to fight over those issues.

 

In my view the non Americans were usually weirdly projecting their own national issues on to the Americans. Like Brexit was the same thing as trump. It isn't.

 

Like the vast majority of US political discussion these days its still trump (or his political cult of personality movement) vs  anti trump even though trump the person is now benched.

 

Its not real debate. People's minds are already made up in tribal ways. 

 

In other words, no big loss. It wasn't really productive for the users.

 

Unlike say a visa forum where people actually are open to learn new things and they do.

[youreavinalaff]

16 hours ago, Scott said:

I believe the providers that Thaivisa was using have raised their prices considerably.   So, I would say that is the primary reason.  Mods and Admin were not given a great deal of insight into the reasoning.  

 

So why not allow forum members to provide the news? 

 

Links direct to stories don't need to be used, if not allowed. Posters could start a new thread with something like " Did you see the news about............?"

 

One of the most popular topics in recent weeks was a poll started by you, @Scott. That was free, wasn't it?

[polpott]

17 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

So why not allow forum members to provide the news? 

 

Links direct to stories don't need to be used, if not allowed. Posters could start a new thread with something like " Did you see the news about............?"

 

One of the most popular topics in recent weeks was a poll started by you, @Scott. That was free, wasn't it?

And why not allow threads that were already running to continue?