2 ms·

> This sounds great to me Keep in mind, this is not motivated by your interests and has nothing in it that is there to help them. It's based on an a priori ass

by zmmmmm 6y ago

> This sounds great to me Keep in mind, this is not motivated by your interests and has nothing in it that is there to help them. It's based on an a priori assumption that old media is good for consumers interests and all of the benefits it provides are directed to a newly invented category of "registered news businesses" which will have special rules. So no, you're not going to find out changes to algorithmic ranking in advance, nor will you get information about how and when Google collect information on you. It'll be provided to Rupert Murdoch, but not you nor anyone who doesn't qualify as a large media conglomerate.

cyphar 6y ago
Look, I'm not going to deny that this is obviously motivated by News Corp and Fairfax lobbyists. However, the ACCC is legitimately one of the really brilliant government agencies here in Australia -- our consumer protection laws are actually designed around protecting consumers interests and I would argue is firmly on the list of positives when taking stock of the pros and cons of living here.
- sjy 6y ago
  It’s worth noting that, while the ACCC did recommend “requiring designated digital platforms to each provide the Australian Communications and Media Authority with codes to address the imbalance in the bargaining relationship between these platforms and news media businesses and recognise the need for value sharing and monetisation of content” [1], the “mandatory bargaining code” policy resulted from a more recent and specific direction from the government [2]. [1] https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/holistic-dynamic-reforms-needed-to-address-dominance-of-digital-platforms https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/holistic-dynamic-refor... [2] https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/josh-frydenberg-2018/media-releases/accc-mandatory-code-conduct-govern-commercial https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/josh-frydenberg-...
- nl 6y ago
  The ACCC is great. (I'm Australian, and think it's a awesome example of a regulator with real teeth) But this makes no sense! Why should Google be forced to pay News Corp to display its headlines, when other smaller companies have to pay for ads for to get the same exposure?

by zmmmmm 6y ago

cyphar 6y ago

Look, I'm not going to deny that this is obviously motivated by News Corp and Fairfax lobbyists. However, the ACCC is legitimately one of the really brilliant government agencies here in Australia -- our consumer protection laws are actually designed around protecting consumers interests and I would argue is firmly on the list of positives when taking stock of the pros and cons of living here.

sjy 6y ago
It’s worth noting that, while the ACCC did recommend “requiring designated digital platforms to each provide the Australian Communications and Media Authority with codes to address the imbalance in the bargaining relationship between these platforms and news media businesses and recognise the need for value sharing and monetisation of content” [1], the “mandatory bargaining code” policy resulted from a more recent and specific direction from the government [2]. [1] https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/holistic-dynamic-reforms-needed-to-address-dominance-of-digital-platforms https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/holistic-dynamic-refor... [2] https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/josh-frydenberg-2018/media-releases/accc-mandatory-code-conduct-govern-commercial https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/josh-frydenberg-...
nl 6y ago
The ACCC is great. (I'm Australian, and think it's a awesome example of a regulator with real teeth) But this makes no sense! Why should Google be forced to pay News Corp to display its headlines, when other smaller companies have to pay for ads for to get the same exposure?