3 ms·
It is worth remembering the Australia fiasco. The Australian media led by Murdoch basically shook down Facebook until they came to am agreement to give the medi
by graeme 6y ago
It is worth remembering the Australia fiasco. The Australian media led by Murdoch basically shook down Facebook until they came to am agreement to give the media kickbacks. Then Australia agreed not to apply its law.
The European media has also demanded payments, even though the value flows from sending traffic to news sites and not the other way around.
The media seems to believe it is entitled to be send traffic AND to be paid for it. Common story all over the world.
So, to reduce those demands in America, Facebook pays kickbacks to the biggest media orgs.
Here, the media publication is presenting it as a grant for favourable coverage. But the far more likely explanation is Facebook knows the media will shake it down for more money unless it gives them a payoff.
- _rpd 6y ago> the social media giant has been funneling money to America’s biggest news organizations—and hanging the rest of the press out to dry. The complaint here doesn't seem to be that Facebook is handing out money, but rather that not everyone is getting a cut.
- lolinder 6y agoWhich likewise suggests that the money's purpose is to avoid another Australia. If the large players are all appeased, the small ones stand little chance of influencing Congress on their own.
- graeme 6y agoAnd further articles like this serve the purpose of requesting broader payoffs. Nowhere does the article question why the media gets money for nothing. The article assumes it is the media’s right and the money should be increased and more widely distributed.
- PoignardAzur 6y agoAnd that is called paying the Dane-geld; But we've proved it again and again, That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld You never get rid of the Dane.