3 ms·

Isn't this something the publishers can just stop with a robots.txt? Or do they want Google to continue to link to them and just charge them for it? I hope Goo

Isn't this something the publishers can just stop with a robots.txt? Or do they want Google to continue to link to them and just charge them for it? I hope Google just drops them from the index.

kevsim 6y ago
It's definitely the latter. They still want to be indexed of course and I'd assume they'd rather be included in Google News and paid for it rather than not included.
criddell 6y ago
I hope Google and Facebook recognize the value they get from news publishers and understand the value society gets from journalism and they do more to support that journalism that benefits everybody.
- renewiltord 6y ago
  Haha, I went to the websites of the guys pushing for this. News.com.au Hoo boy am I glad I don’t get value from that. Oof. Dang. Look at that. Oh boy.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  I recognize the value I get from news publishers and try to support them. It would never in a million years occur to me that, when I tell someone "here's this neat article I read about new studies on the minimum wage", I owe the newspaper for being allowed to do that.
  - criddell 6y ago
    Sure. If telling people about the news is making you money, why not share some of the profit from doing that with the newspaper? If you don't do that, aren't you in effect killing the golden goose?
    - Nasrudith 6y ago
      Do you give money to the construction workers who built the road every time you drive to work? Even if it is taken for granted as a common good doesn't make the monetization model wise or justified. A taxation model by "lottery" which randomly takes everything from an unlucky N people a year would work terrible in so many ways. Wanting a funding model that isn't terrible doesn't mean they don't want a functioning government.
      - criddell 6y ago
        > Do you give money to the construction workers who built the road every time you drive to work? In a way, yes. There are lots of usage taxes around driving that help fund road construction.

Isn't this something the publishers can just stop with a robots.txt? Or do they want Google to continue to link to them and just charge them for it? I hope Google just drops them from the index.

kevsim 6y ago

It's definitely the latter. They still want to be indexed of course and I'd assume they'd rather be included in Google News and paid for it rather than not included.

criddell 6y ago

I hope Google and Facebook recognize the value they get from news publishers and understand the value society gets from journalism and they do more to support that journalism that benefits everybody.

renewiltord 6y ago
Haha, I went to the websites of the guys pushing for this. News.com.au Hoo boy am I glad I don’t get value from that. Oof. Dang. Look at that. Oh boy.
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
I recognize the value I get from news publishers and try to support them. It would never in a million years occur to me that, when I tell someone "here's this neat article I read about new studies on the minimum wage", I owe the newspaper for being allowed to do that.
- criddell 6y ago
  Sure. If telling people about the news is making you money, why not share some of the profit from doing that with the newspaper? If you don't do that, aren't you in effect killing the golden goose?
  - Nasrudith 6y ago
    Do you give money to the construction workers who built the road every time you drive to work? Even if it is taken for granted as a common good doesn't make the monetization model wise or justified. A taxation model by "lottery" which randomly takes everything from an unlucky N people a year would work terrible in so many ways. Wanting a funding model that isn't terrible doesn't mean they don't want a functioning government.
    - criddell 6y ago
      > Do you give money to the construction workers who built the road every time you drive to work? In a way, yes. There are lots of usage taxes around driving that help fund road construction.