of hugely entertaining farces on the other side of the rock
"so much for facebook’s commitment to free speech,” a mail online spokesperson said. hilarious.
honestly, you'd think scomo would be relieved that at least one social media giant isn't sharing the damning details of his government's cover-up of a rape in parliament house.
(, Thu 18 Feb 2021, 21:51, Reply)
don't support a political party - don't vote for them
don't support a business - shop elsewhere
idgi
why are these folk relying on a profiteering proxy to consume their news anyway?
(, Thu 18 Feb 2021, 22:00, Reply)
I don't use FB, never have, but I get how and why people become dependant on it.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with what Australia is doing, FB and Google's news feeds tend to link to the original source rather than stealing the news per se.
I think the bigger problem is with targetted fake news and radicalising bubble algorithms, and I'm not sure that this Australian law even addresses that.
(, Thu 18 Feb 2021, 22:18, Reply)
bar pbs - how are online advertising conduits any different? market forces an all that
see also: ticket touts
and the recent spotify discussion below
(, Thu 18 Feb 2021, 22:48, Reply)
blocking emergency services seems a bit foot, aim, fire
(, Thu 18 Feb 2021, 22:51, Reply)
(, Fri 19 Feb 2021, 15:10, Reply)
just warring businesses, and those who are drawn into the conflict.
old media is horrified by its collapse following the hegemony of online social and news media.
the so-called 'rivers of gold' have dried up and worse, new media upstarts are super-branding their content and effectively stealing their own meagre advertising revenue.
even worse, the political will of moguls like murdoch, exerted through their editorial content, is being corrupted by aggregators that care nothing for their poisonous rhetoric.
so old media - ok, murdoch - says to his lackey, the prime minister, scott morrison, 'make the bastards pay for any of my content they allow their audience to share or otherwise consume.'
facebook and google think, fuck you old media. we're not paying for your shit and it's no skin off our nose if your backwater nation loses access to our services.
scomo digs his heels in, cos he doesn't like murdoch's grip on his shaven testes, and facebook delivers on its threat.
because the legislation is as vague as it is ridiculous, facebook cannot initially define what content falls into the category of chargeable media and wipes the bally lot. including, unfortunately, a whole bunch of government, charity and social service pages.
the wider media have field day with this pr wobble, and lash out, somewhat cautiously in some cases.
facebook are hastily restoring the good stuff, but there's no way they'll accede to murdoch's demands.
i'm actually looking forward to google turning off search in aus altogether.
we'll all have to use bing and scomo will be booted out as soon as an election can be called.
(, Fri 19 Feb 2021, 1:39, Reply)
but all this waffle about new media and super-branding, whatever that is, hides the fact that the journalists who are creating the content aren't getting the money for people reading it, google and facebook are. More than half the people who see news stories in their google results wont click on the link but will simply read the headline and the description on google. So the advertisers spend their money where the eyeballs are, google, and the places that pay journalists don't get any money. Google takes almost 6 of every 10 advertising dollars spent in Australia, and they paid 1.5% tax last financial year on revenues. Google and facebook didn't used to do this as their revenue model, they've just exploited their free access to other peoples content to keep all the advertising revenue, and investigative journalism is fucking dying around the world. It's little different to the early days of the internet where people stole whole sites and stuck them in an iframe on their own sites and pretended it was their content, until that was legislated against.
(, Fri 19 Feb 2021, 2:10, Reply)
“The ultimate hidden truth of the world is that it is something we make. And could just as easily make differently – David Graeber 1961-2020”
(, Fri 19 Feb 2021, 2:15, Reply)
It's hard enough changing one fucker's mind, let alone this horde of stupid assholes with heads full of nonsense that seem to be proliferating around the world
(, Fri 19 Feb 2021, 2:23, Reply)
i'm sure you couldn't care less, but it means setting your own brand in any superposition to the brand of the thing you're presenting.
like your iframe example, where the original content's banner is not shown.
You're not declaring the thing as your own, but the audience will make that connection themselves.
(, Fri 19 Feb 2021, 3:28, Reply)
I got a nice personal thank you letter from the guardian legal once by giving them screenshots and links of facebook ads that were showing guardian articles but linking to their own stuff when you clicked on them. facebook, off course, somehow finds it difficult to police scam artists that by coincidence happen to paying facebook for ads. I mean, they have an algorithm that can tell if a women is pregnant before she knows herself, but finding out if advertising is linking to content that isn't their own website has their tech guys baffled, I tells ya
(, Fri 19 Feb 2021, 3:51, Reply)
it's new. like a baby.
use it in an email today /ac
also, i was on the executive of the canberra times for a couple of turns. i gotta say i don't got much sympathy for the paper industry after that stint.
(, Fri 19 Feb 2021, 4:04, Reply)
seem like a good one, and it's not being used. I'll try and use it today as well to see if we can get the ball rolling on it. End Super-Branding Now!
(, Fri 19 Feb 2021, 4:09, Reply)
(, Sat 20 Feb 2021, 17:34, Reply)
Should get to fuck. Aussies v Facebook. Gets popcorn out and goes to sleep. They deserve each other
(, Thu 18 Feb 2021, 23:27, Reply)
