3 ms·
The eating part might be more literal than most expect. For example, it's hard to argue that software made journalism better. Sure, there is some efficiency in
by yholio 5y ago
The eating part might be more literal than most expect.
For example, it's hard to argue that software made journalism better. Sure, there is some efficiency in using a phone to record interviews and sending the results of your work on seconds on the other side of the world - as opposed to things like notepads and telexes.
On the other hand, Google and Facebook almost completely eviscerated the revenue streams that fed traditional journalists, without putting anything in it's place.
Instead of a large number of local papers and ad agencies earning local revenue and funding journalists, you have a massive revenue stream going into Google's offshore tax shells, of which a part is used to fund their software mercenary army, and the bulk is reimvested into further tech monopolies.
The corrupt and the despots surely welcome the tech overlords.
- oblio 5y agoWorse than that, they're taking away money from local businesses. Local markets, local stores, local shops, local newspapers, local magazines, small businesses, etc. They're vampires centralizing local revenues worldwide and for what?!? That money gets reinvested or offshored so that about 100 billionaires live like kings with about 2 million millionaire flunkies working for them.