4 ms·

> Google & Fb know they are very powerful with limited obligations to Australians and so they are acting arrogantly and oppressively in their approach. I don't

> Google & Fb know they are very powerful with limited obligations to Australians and so they are acting arrogantly and oppressively in their approach. I don't see what's arrogant about Facebook's approach here. They say they do not derive much value from this content, and the government is proposing to charge them much more than the value they do derive. So they are left with the only rational choice: to not have the content. That's not a threat, a punishment, an attack, or anything else. It's just a decision that needs to be made in light of the tradeoffs facing their business. The proof will be in the pudding, but I suspect Facebook will suffer minimal economic harm from blocking the news. That will be clear evidence as to who was the economic beneficiary of their relationship with the news media.

marcod 6y ago
I could totally see news orgs come crawling back to FB and ask them to put all the traffic back.
- jsnell 6y ago
  Of course. But the law will not allow for that. If FB allows any news content (e.g. from news orgs that want their content to be listd for free), they must allow all news content (e.g. from news orgs that will want to be paid unrealistic amounts for it).
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
    One also wonders whether Google would have put a termination clause in their contract with the news orgs in the event the law is repealed. And is Google really going to provide them notice of algorithm changes? Very interesting to see how that's going to be done if so.
bardan 6y ago
(Assuming all of this is a matter of Google and Facebook not "playing fair") I think it's very likely Facebook would still find profit in this arrangement, just less profit than before, but since they do business with other countries as well they don't want to give in. "OK we'll start playing fair and reduce profit in your market" = "OK we'll start playing fair and reduce profit in all markets"
chris_wot 6y ago
If they don't derive much value from the content, then it shouldn't be terribly awful they have blocked the content. But I suspect that's not the truth. Not by a long shot.
- evolve2k 6y ago
  In the link they said it’s only 4% of their content but on the radio this morning (national Australian station Triple J), they stated that it’s a big deal as “many people rely on Facebook as their source of news”.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
  It won't be bad for them. And I believe that's the case, otherwise they wouldn't have blocked it. As to their users and especially the media: we'll see.

marcod 6y ago

I could totally see news orgs come crawling back to FB and ask them to put all the traffic back.

jsnell 6y ago
Of course. But the law will not allow for that. If FB allows any news content (e.g. from news orgs that want their content to be listd for free), they must allow all news content (e.g. from news orgs that will want to be paid unrealistic amounts for it).
- asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
  One also wonders whether Google would have put a termination clause in their contract with the news orgs in the event the law is repealed. And is Google really going to provide them notice of algorithm changes? Very interesting to see how that's going to be done if so.

bardan 6y ago

(Assuming all of this is a matter of Google and Facebook not "playing fair") I think it's very likely Facebook would still find profit in this arrangement, just less profit than before, but since they do business with other countries as well they don't want to give in. "OK we'll start playing fair and reduce profit in your market" = "OK we'll start playing fair and reduce profit in all markets"

chris_wot 6y ago

If they don't derive much value from the content, then it shouldn't be terribly awful they have blocked the content. But I suspect that's not the truth. Not by a long shot.

evolve2k 6y ago
In the link they said it’s only 4% of their content but on the radio this morning (national Australian station Triple J), they stated that it’s a big deal as “many people rely on Facebook as their source of news”.
asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
It won't be bad for them. And I believe that's the case, otherwise they wouldn't have blocked it. As to their users and especially the media: we'll see.