4 ms·

This seems to mean that fewer Canadians will be engaging on Facebook, and that news articles from outlets that meet the official standards of Facebook and the g

This seems to mean that fewer Canadians will be engaging on Facebook, and that news articles from outlets that meet the official standards of Facebook and the government will have a smaller audience. In terms of improving the quality of public discourse, how is this not win-win?

CivBase 4y ago
Genuine question: Why would most users engage less with Facebook as a result of this? I'd expect most users to continue what they were doing before, but now their feed of headlines will come exclusively from international sources. I doubt I'd engage less with HN if they banned articles from US companies.
- motohagiography 4y ago
  Arguably fewer news articles means less outrage, yielding lower engagement. The recipe for a news story requires events and a conflict to tell the story of, and official news sources largely fabricate that conflict and decorate it with the events of the day. The fabrication comes from ideology, one that percieves everything as conflict and power struggle. It's why the news often seems like utter nonsense. I don't watch it anymore because I can't sustain a state of cringe that long, but anything that reduces its reach is something I can get behind.
  - cowl 4y ago
    But this will not lower engagment, User will Quote the headline and part of text and you just don't have the original link. The discussion will follow from there and worse than before. Now every discussion can by default be taken out of the context and cause even more outrage because it will not be verified by 99% of the users who will not go out of their way to search for the orginal link if it's not there. The discussion will continue as is shown uo until now without the need to read the article itself. "What's you reference for this claim?" is not a valid question anymore because linking the reference is not allowed.

CivBase 4y ago

Genuine question: Why would most users engage less with Facebook as a result of this? I'd expect most users to continue what they were doing before, but now their feed of headlines will come exclusively from international sources. I doubt I'd engage less with HN if they banned articles from US companies.

motohagiography 4y ago
Arguably fewer news articles means less outrage, yielding lower engagement. The recipe for a news story requires events and a conflict to tell the story of, and official news sources largely fabricate that conflict and decorate it with the events of the day. The fabrication comes from ideology, one that percieves everything as conflict and power struggle. It's why the news often seems like utter nonsense. I don't watch it anymore because I can't sustain a state of cringe that long, but anything that reduces its reach is something I can get behind.
- cowl 4y ago
  But this will not lower engagment, User will Quote the headline and part of text and you just don't have the original link. The discussion will follow from there and worse than before. Now every discussion can by default be taken out of the context and cause even more outrage because it will not be verified by 99% of the users who will not go out of their way to search for the orginal link if it's not there. The discussion will continue as is shown uo until now without the need to read the article itself. "What's you reference for this claim?" is not a valid question anymore because linking the reference is not allowed.