5 ms·

This is not a "free speech" issue. At all. The FBI didn't show up and shut down the ZH domain. ZH has not been removed from Google's search index. Tyler Durd

This is not a "free speech" issue. At all. The FBI didn't show up and shut down the ZH domain. ZH has not been removed from Google's search index. Tyler Durden's fingers were not amputated. Nobody's speech is being prevented. No business is entitled to any other business' monetization. No store has to sell every product. The store doesn't even have to give a reason. Anyway, ZH has MANY other monetization strategies. It is read enough by traders that subscription would be a good option. Have a nice day.

koheripbal 6y ago
You are conflating the 1st amendment with "free speech". The First Amendment is what protects the People from the Government. Free Speech is a principle that people should be allowed to express themselves as freely as possible, because contrarian speech provides a critical public service.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- jonahbenton 6y ago
  Good lord, no. Express yourself, yes, be free from the consequences of expressing yourself- no, unless you are a child. Be entitled to compensation, no, or to compel others to enter into business arrangements with you- no. There is no restriction on expression, in principle or in law. Certain private entities no longer wish to work with Mr Durden in a particular business context. He is free to find others, in fact, he may contract with his advertisers directly, which many prefer to do rather than go through an intermediary platform, like Google, that can take 70% or more when all is said and done. Or contract with his audience, which by the tone of HN comments would be delighted to pay Mr Durden directly for the value his publication provides them. Advertising has always led to the sorts of conflations of which you mistakenly speak, where the loss of an advertiser, or an advertising platform, is a restriction on freedom. No- precisely the opposite. Freedom means you are free to fuck things up for yourself, free to bear the consequences, free to make your way. Cheers.
  - koheripbal 6y ago
    This logic breaks down when a company becomes so large as to become an international utility. ZeroHedge has no alternative to Ad-based revenues. Google is effectively a monopoly in that market. ...and think about that. That means that Google can effectively put any online news publication out of business, at will. "but hey, they can just go to news.google.com, right?" Think about the degree of power you are happily handing Google.
    - jonahbenton 6y ago
      Sorry, as someone who has been in the business, this is completely false. There are plenty of alternative networks. I used to work for one. Plenty of content sites that do direct advertising. Even plenty of ways to run one's own adserver. They're open source! Yes, losing monetization through one platform is rough, but that's the algorithm. He has an audience, a valuable audience. If he can't monetize it, it's not from loss of freedom, it's from lack of brains. Furthermore, every high traffic, high value property Google drops is an opportunity for someone else. It's not handing power to Google. It's Google ceding power. Cheers.
      - koheripbal 6y ago
        What's the other online advertising provider?
        jonahbenton 6y ago
        There are many. Advertising is a hundreds of $B, tens of thousands of companies ecosystem. Thousands of subniches. I worked at AppNexus, now Xandr, which was a platform for thousands of B2B companies, both buy- and sell-side. OpenX is another big platform. Verizon. Note that there are pipes between all of the big players, so that everyone sees a lot of everyone else's inventory. ZH is such an ideal ad property: lots of content, high rate of production, very targeted and wealthy audience- if ZH hadn't previously been doing direct deals (which are so much more lucrative for the publisher) then they are just failing at capitalism. Being dropped by Google may turn out to be a blessing. Google is an enormous player, to be sure, but Ads are not Search. Completely different business and dynamics. And ZH is still available for search. Cheers.
jonahbenton 6y ago
Love the downvotes. Children on this platform. Actual children.

koheripbal 6y ago

You are conflating the 1st amendment with "free speech". The First Amendment is what protects the People from the Government. Free Speech is a principle that people should be allowed to express themselves as freely as possible, because contrarian speech provides a critical public service.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jonahbenton 6y ago
Good lord, no. Express yourself, yes, be free from the consequences of expressing yourself- no, unless you are a child. Be entitled to compensation, no, or to compel others to enter into business arrangements with you- no. There is no restriction on expression, in principle or in law. Certain private entities no longer wish to work with Mr Durden in a particular business context. He is free to find others, in fact, he may contract with his advertisers directly, which many prefer to do rather than go through an intermediary platform, like Google, that can take 70% or more when all is said and done. Or contract with his audience, which by the tone of HN comments would be delighted to pay Mr Durden directly for the value his publication provides them. Advertising has always led to the sorts of conflations of which you mistakenly speak, where the loss of an advertiser, or an advertising platform, is a restriction on freedom. No- precisely the opposite. Freedom means you are free to fuck things up for yourself, free to bear the consequences, free to make your way. Cheers.
- koheripbal 6y ago
  This logic breaks down when a company becomes so large as to become an international utility. ZeroHedge has no alternative to Ad-based revenues. Google is effectively a monopoly in that market. ...and think about that. That means that Google can effectively put any online news publication out of business, at will. "but hey, they can just go to news.google.com, right?" Think about the degree of power you are happily handing Google.
  - jonahbenton 6y ago
    Sorry, as someone who has been in the business, this is completely false. There are plenty of alternative networks. I used to work for one. Plenty of content sites that do direct advertising. Even plenty of ways to run one's own adserver. They're open source! Yes, losing monetization through one platform is rough, but that's the algorithm. He has an audience, a valuable audience. If he can't monetize it, it's not from loss of freedom, it's from lack of brains. Furthermore, every high traffic, high value property Google drops is an opportunity for someone else. It's not handing power to Google. It's Google ceding power. Cheers.
    - koheripbal 6y ago
      What's the other online advertising provider?
      - jonahbenton 6y ago
        There are many. Advertising is a hundreds of $B, tens of thousands of companies ecosystem. Thousands of subniches. I worked at AppNexus, now Xandr, which was a platform for thousands of B2B companies, both buy- and sell-side. OpenX is another big platform. Verizon. Note that there are pipes between all of the big players, so that everyone sees a lot of everyone else's inventory. ZH is such an ideal ad property: lots of content, high rate of production, very targeted and wealthy audience- if ZH hadn't previously been doing direct deals (which are so much more lucrative for the publisher) then they are just failing at capitalism. Being dropped by Google may turn out to be a blessing. Google is an enormous player, to be sure, but Ads are not Search. Completely different business and dynamics. And ZH is still available for search. Cheers.

jonahbenton 6y ago

Love the downvotes. Children on this platform. Actual children.