4 ms·

I think previous attempts along these lines have proven that, if you actually manage to force Facebook (or Google) to pay for linking to your content, they will

I think previous attempts along these lines have proven that, if you actually manage to force Facebook (or Google) to pay for linking to your content, they will just stop linking to your content. If your content is news, anyway. Harsh as it is, they are probably making the right business decision. Would people really see fewer FB (or Google) ads if there were no news content there? I don't think that's why most people go to FB or Google. It reminds me somewhat of the fights in the 80's and early 90's about pirated software, in which Microsoft wanted people to all pay for Office, but didn't want them to consider free options. They never quite pushed the issue as hard as they could have, because I think at some level they knew that if they got an ironclad anti-piracy strategy, it would simply have caused StarOffice (or other options available at the time) to skyrocket. I'm not saying it's good, but the truth is that news is currently getting $$ roughly equivalent to how much people value it.

space_fountain 4y ago
Sure, but is it equivalent to how much value it provides? Would the world be better or worse off if news media shrunk to take up only the amount of resources people are willing to give it as charity? It seems like not. Local news has been decimated, people increasingly only pay attention to national issues helping accelerate polarization. It seems like a lot of the value news provides is given by just the titles which is tricky for the companies involved
- rossdavidh 4y ago
  I think it is plausible that a "public radio" type funding model could work, but only after you have a working news source that people find worth supporting. This is a chicken-and-egg problem (aka a bootstrapping problem). But, my earlier statement was only intended to describe the current state of things, and is no way an endorsement of that state. I agree a greater focus on local news would be preferable, for many reasons.

space_fountain 4y ago

Sure, but is it equivalent to how much value it provides? Would the world be better or worse off if news media shrunk to take up only the amount of resources people are willing to give it as charity? It seems like not. Local news has been decimated, people increasingly only pay attention to national issues helping accelerate polarization. It seems like a lot of the value news provides is given by just the titles which is tricky for the companies involved

rossdavidh 4y ago
I think it is plausible that a "public radio" type funding model could work, but only after you have a working news source that people find worth supporting. This is a chicken-and-egg problem (aka a bootstrapping problem). But, my earlier statement was only intended to describe the current state of things, and is no way an endorsement of that state. I agree a greater focus on local news would be preferable, for many reasons.