4 ms·

quick criticism here from the 'vested side of society without showing any alternatives.. where are the other solutions? 'local news dead, stock market goes up'

quick criticism here from the 'vested side of society without showing any alternatives.. where are the other solutions? 'local news dead, stock market goes up' headline for what, ten years now?

zdragnar 3y ago
In a world where people interact with their friends online more than in meat space, and hardly know their own neighbors at all, local news isn't going to survive very well. This particular strategy has been tried in various forms in various places, and it never works. Any time you see someone say the phrase "doing nothing is not an option", you know that they are making excuses for doing something that has proven, time and again, to be just as effective as doing nothing at all.
- CharlesW 3y ago
  > In a world where people interact with their friends online more than in meat space, and hardly know their own neighbors at all, local news isn't going to survive very well. Local news is alive and well! It just moved to Facebook, NextDoor, etc.
- tivert 3y ago
  > Any time you see someone say the phrase "doing nothing is not an option", you know that they are making excuses for doing something that has proven, time and again, to be just as effective as doing nothing at all. No, you're going to far. "Doing nothing is not an option", means "don't wait for a perfect solution." "Doing nothing at all" is rarely "just as effective" as an imperfect solution, at least when it comes to the problem under discussion. It's also worth noting there are frequently people who benefit from certain problems or who are otherwise uninterested in solving them for selfish reasons. Those people really like to push the "do nothing" option.
  - zdragnar 3y ago
    This has been done before elsewhere, and it was exactly as effective as doing nothing. I'm not much for gambling, but I'd put money on this attempt ending the same way. It's a mindset that is action-biased. Results don't matter, being seen to be doing things is what matters, apparently.
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> where are the other solutions Subsidizing local news isn't a bad idea. It's doing it like that's stupid. Just tax social media use in California and use that to fund a revenue-positive subsidy.
- KerrAvon 3y ago
  Seems like a good idea, but who do you tax and how do you collect it? I already don't want my ISP monitoring my internet usage. Tax the companies directly?
  - ericd 3y ago
    Don’t meter it, just make it a flat fee based on average?
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > who do you tax and how do you collect it Social media companies with more than N users in the state. Simplest: user tax. Complicated: fraction of attributed revenue or a user-hour toll.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      I think it'd be more just to tax the readers. Add it to their ISP bill. Similar to our radio or television tax in the UK
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > I think it'd be more just to tax the readers The U.K. has legally and culturally normalised this. That’s not as easy in America, by design.
        s1artibartfast 3y ago
        Sure, I agree it would be exceptional and isn't particularly realistic. I just think that it is more legally and culturally acceptable in the US then forcing one company to pay another company for a good that they aren't the consumer of and they don't want to partner with. It's like forcing coffee shops to pay Disney because people exercise their free speech and discuss Marvel movies under their roof. It's actually worth cuz this bill would do the equivalent of banning coffee shops rules against discussing Marvel movies too. The whole topic is absurd given legislative inaction on paywall bypass tools and archive sites, which blatantly steal copyrighted content.

quick criticism here from the 'vested side of society without showing any alternatives.. where are the other solutions? 'local news dead, stock market goes up' headline for what, ten years now?

zdragnar 3y ago

In a world where people interact with their friends online more than in meat space, and hardly know their own neighbors at all, local news isn't going to survive very well. This particular strategy has been tried in various forms in various places, and it never works. Any time you see someone say the phrase "doing nothing is not an option", you know that they are making excuses for doing something that has proven, time and again, to be just as effective as doing nothing at all.

CharlesW 3y ago
> In a world where people interact with their friends online more than in meat space, and hardly know their own neighbors at all, local news isn't going to survive very well. Local news is alive and well! It just moved to Facebook, NextDoor, etc.
tivert 3y ago
> Any time you see someone say the phrase "doing nothing is not an option", you know that they are making excuses for doing something that has proven, time and again, to be just as effective as doing nothing at all. No, you're going to far. "Doing nothing is not an option", means "don't wait for a perfect solution." "Doing nothing at all" is rarely "just as effective" as an imperfect solution, at least when it comes to the problem under discussion. It's also worth noting there are frequently people who benefit from certain problems or who are otherwise uninterested in solving them for selfish reasons. Those people really like to push the "do nothing" option.
- zdragnar 3y ago
  This has been done before elsewhere, and it was exactly as effective as doing nothing. I'm not much for gambling, but I'd put money on this attempt ending the same way. It's a mindset that is action-biased. Results don't matter, being seen to be doing things is what matters, apparently.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> where are the other solutions Subsidizing local news isn't a bad idea. It's doing it like that's stupid. Just tax social media use in California and use that to fund a revenue-positive subsidy.

KerrAvon 3y ago
Seems like a good idea, but who do you tax and how do you collect it? I already don't want my ISP monitoring my internet usage. Tax the companies directly?
- ericd 3y ago
  Don’t meter it, just make it a flat fee based on average?
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > who do you tax and how do you collect it Social media companies with more than N users in the state. Simplest: user tax. Complicated: fraction of attributed revenue or a user-hour toll.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    I think it'd be more just to tax the readers. Add it to their ISP bill. Similar to our radio or television tax in the UK
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > I think it'd be more just to tax the readers The U.K. has legally and culturally normalised this. That’s not as easy in America, by design.
      - s1artibartfast 3y ago
        Sure, I agree it would be exceptional and isn't particularly realistic. I just think that it is more legally and culturally acceptable in the US then forcing one company to pay another company for a good that they aren't the consumer of and they don't want to partner with. It's like forcing coffee shops to pay Disney because people exercise their free speech and discuss Marvel movies under their roof. It's actually worth cuz this bill would do the equivalent of banning coffee shops rules against discussing Marvel movies too. The whole topic is absurd given legislative inaction on paywall bypass tools and archive sites, which blatantly steal copyrighted content.