Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[fotze2]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I hope the Liberal government and especially the Minister(s) who were most influential in crafting this bill are feeling a lot of heat right now because of this terrible law. I'm glad that Google and Meta are pulling Canadian news in response.

Ya but look at what Danielle Smith is doing.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

Facebook and Google sending a message that they can throw their weight around vs. the Canadian government is largely how I read that, which in a certain way is suggestive of the importance of exerting sovereign interests in the media space.

Have people no faith in the market to innovate and find solutions?

Literally the only large media resource in this country that isn't constantly saying their business is collapsing is CBC because they are fully subsidized by the government. The market is saying news is not a viable business in Canada. That is not good for the future of this country unless you want to be a country where the government controls the media. CTV/Bell wants to cut out local news requirements (and you can be sure Rogers will follow). Postmedia and Torstar are negotiating to merge - I assume so the finance companies that own them both can get a few more years of interest payments until they collapse.

This is basically a work around to subsidize these companies by making Google/Meta pay these companies.

If they just directly subsidized these companies - posters here would be claiming the government is picking the media winners and losers and they shouldn't do that.

[fotze2]

I believe that sometimes it may be necessary for some people/orgs from being stopped from saying things in extreme cases,.

BUT preventing me from hearing those things is far far worse than those potentially awful things being said.

If I am at a rally (which I would never be at) and some nazi is saying jews suck, and someone comes by and staples earmuffs to my head, the earmuff guy is going to get the baseball bat to their childs face way sooner than the nazi.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by opendoor

That's not to say the law is good or smart or anything, but I just don't take giant corporations' words at face value. They're trying to make as much money as possible.

As opposed to poor struggling small businesses like Bell or Rogers who own the media outlets that would be getting paid as part of this ruling and who lobbied Liberals and pushed for C-18 and C-11 in the first place? All while making job cuts to maximize shareholder profits?

https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pm...-blocking-news

The issue with C-11 and C-18 is that both have direct obvious corporate beneficiaries, to the detriment of Canadians (in the case of C-18 easy accessible news and information).

C-18 does absolutely nothing to benefit Canadians, and it's foolhardy to think that Google / Meta should just pony up some cash when they can simply and freely choose not to link (again to the detriment of Canadians).

It could be certainly argued that sharing the full article should be fairly and rightfully compensated, but this is not what C-18 does.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Firebot

As opposed to poor struggling small businesses like Bell or Rogers who own the media outlets that would be getting paid as part of this ruling and who lobbied Liberals and pushed for C-18 and C-11 in the first place? All while making job cuts to maximize shareholder profits?

https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pm...-blocking-news

The issue with C-11 and C-18 is that both have direct obvious corporate beneficiaries, to the detriment of Canadians (in the case of C-18 easy accessible news and information).

C-18 does absolutely nothing to benefit Canadians, and it's foolhardy to think that Google / Meta should just pony up some cash when they can simply and freely choose not to link (again to the detriment of Canadians).

It could be certainly argued that sharing the full article should be fairly and rightfully compensated, but this is not what C-18 does.

Bell and Rogers would benefit - more Bell since CTVnews website has some popularity but in terms of % of revenue, would be shocked if it doesn't help Postmedia, Globe and Mail, Torstar and smaller digital outlets more by orders of magnitude.

[Firebot]

It would help them as well to a degree.

The problem is that C-18 is done in a vacuum in a capitalist society where it's presumed that Meta and Google will simply just hand out money bags when it doesn't need to. The premise that they would just pay shows the arrogance of our current government.

If it's worth their while, they will pay, but both have stated they do not need to do so. Canadian media outlets need Meta / Google more than the opposite.

Realists understand this, and see why C-18 is detrimental to Canadian media and Canadians.

It's a poorly written law that critics and experts warned of consequences that are materializing now.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Firebot

As opposed to poor struggling small businesses like Bell or Rogers who own the media outlets that would be getting paid as part of this ruling and who lobbied Liberals and pushed for C-18 and C-11 in the first place? All while making job cuts to maximize shareholder profits?

https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pm...-blocking-news

The issue with C-11 and C-18 is that both have direct obvious corporate beneficiaries, to the detriment of Canadians (in the case of C-18 easy accessible news and information).

C-18 does absolutely nothing to benefit Canadians, and it's foolhardy to think that Google / Meta should just pony up some cash when they can simply and freely choose not to link (again to the detriment of Canadians).

It could be certainly argued that sharing the full article should be fairly and rightfully compensated, but this is not what C-18 does.

Well I don't take what they say at face value either. I'm sure they'd make a big stink about the impossibility of complying with regulations that don't benefit them as well.

But yeah, this is basically the kind of law I'd expect a corporate-friendly neoliberal party to create, particularly in a country with significant regulatory capture in its media regulator.

But ultimately, other countries/jurisdictions are looking to or have done similar things for a reason. For years, Google's AMP links basically monopolized how ad revenue is generated from news articles to their own benefit (and at the expense of publishers). And sure, their defense is that using them was optional, but there really was no option if you wanted people to be able to find your articles. While AMP links have declined, they're still pulling the same kinds of things. There's a reason why Google was sued by 17 states over anti-trust claims largely based on this very issue

And they've threatened other jurisdictions over far more reasonable regulations. The EU wanted to make it so they couldn't reproduce large parts of articles on their own pages without paying publishers/creators for it (which is reasonable, IMO). So what did Google do? They threatened to pull Google News out of the EU altogether if they didn't get their way. They kept saying how they don't make money off of news, so pulling out wouldn't negatively impact them at all. Lo and behold, the EU called their bluff and they eventually came to an agreement where Google licensed publishers' content.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Yes, we should remove all regulation and red tape so companies can thrive and naturally do what's best for everyone. When car companies spent billions of dollars lobbying against seatbelt laws, airbag laws, catalytic converters, fuel economy standards, etc, claiming they were impossibly expensive to implement, the governments of the day should have just rolled over.

Sure thing Ralph.

I didn't even hint I want a free for all no regulation business environment.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Not paying Canadian Media != censoring. Really odd choice of word coming from you.

Google and Meta don't have a gun to their head they are free to choose whether to pay to link to Canadian media content as per written Liberal / NDP coalition law, or simply not link them. They choose the 2nd.

lol wut

Originally Posted by Firebot

Luckily, thanks to Liberals' infinite wisdom, we will still have access to Fox News sources to us by Meta and Facebook to ensure we have well balanced news sources.

Ironic that this link making this announcement would be censored down to media outlets BBC, WSJ India Times, Al Jazeera and Fox in a few weeks time.

https://www.google.com/search?q=goog...hrome&ie=UTF-8

Are True North and Rebel News considered 'news' as well? Quite the conundrum, they either qualify as Canadian media outlets (much to the chagrin of many) and get censored, or they do not qualify and will not be subject to C-18, and will be at the forefront of Google and Meta in the future when doing a search.

Thanks Trudeau!

Do you even know what you post?

[zamler]

Paying for links to news sites is insane, even greedy Google thinks that is crossing the line.

[bizaro86]

I mean, if the government says you need to pay to link to something, and you say that's fine I won't link to it, it seems like that should be one of your choices.

Otherwise you're just saying "we think this thing is important and you have money so we're taking it". If the government wants to subsidize Canadian news more than they do already they can raise taxes and pay for it. But if the internet firms decide to stop linking to avoid paying you should let them.

Who knows, you might even get an all-Canadian news aggregator springing up to service the demand for curated feeds of quality Canadian news...

[Slava]

Wow, this seems like a complete fiasco. Of Google actually stops linking to Canadian media it's got to be devastating for them.

[Wormius]

I am probably out of touch, but if I want to see what the news is, I just go to the various news sources I have bookmarked. Am I going to notice anything different because of Google or Facebook?

[belsarius]

At this point I think the Bing lobbyists are the ones running the show. Force a whole country to their ####ty search engine. Genius!

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I am probably out of touch, but if I want to see what the news is, I just go to the various news sources I have bookmarked. Am I going to notice anything different because of Google or Facebook?

No, it won't affect anything like that. It'll just mean those platforms won't allow or provide links to Canadian media.

We'll see how long it goes on for; I don't think it's tenable for either side in the long term. It'll just be a matter of who blinks first. Either the companies will compromise like they did in Australia, or they'll hold firm to try to set a precedent to head off future action from other jurisdictions. If that happens, the government will probably realize that its attempt to basically extort some money out of these companies didn't work and they'll amend things.

[JohnnyB]

I see this as a stare down between an elected government and a couple of private foreign entities, and those entities are basically saying "we own your media landscape, so accept our dominance with a smile or be punished".

The government's approach of sticking to their guns while being open to some negotiation is the right one. The market will find its own solutions as long as there is demand for the product.

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

I see this as a stare down between an elected government and a couple of private foreign entities, and those entities are basically saying "we own your media landscape, so accept our dominance with a smile or be punished".

The government's approach of sticking to their guns while being open to some negotiation is the right one. The market will find its own solutions as long as there is demand for the product.

If stupidly got us into this mess, then why can’t it get us out ?

[Fuzz]

Is this just Google not using something like a CBC article in their Google News feed? I can't imagine they would de-index from search, right? If so I don't really see the issue.

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1674540824493694982

https://twitter.com/user/status/1674538975619366912

[Fuzz]

Pierre sporting a more casual look, ditches the glasses and really, really tries to not make Canadians cringe in disgust. Good luck with that.