4 ms·
My understanding was that the complaints was against using larger excerpts. I haven't used neither Googles nor Metas offerings, but the objection that I read in
by mrweasel 3y ago
My understanding was that the complaints was against using larger excerpts. I haven't used neither Googles nor Metas offerings, but the objection that I read in a different article was about users reading the news on Facebook, rather than letting the users click through to the newspapers.
If Google and Meta just generate free traffic for the news site, then I'm not really sure why they're complaining. If their write is straight up reproduced without permission then I understand.
- TekMol 3y agoWhen I visit https://news.google.com https://news.google.com I only see very short excerpts like "Supreme Court Rejects Affirmative Action at U.S. Colleges".
- varenc 3y agoMy interpretation is that Google/Meta do only reproduce short excerpts, however short excerpts is all many people ever read. If those excerpts satisfy people’s interests, then they never end up visiting the actual new sites. Even on HN it’s not uncommon to see people commenting on articles they’ve only read the title of.
- cma 3y agoWill news stories that are just rewrites of other news stories pay the original now?
- pessimizer 3y ago> they never end up visiting the actual news sites. I don't understand anyone who just visits a general news site and reads arbitrary articles. I understand with physical newspapers, because they deliver it to your house in the morning and there was no alternative but to subscribe to multiple papers. I have to think that only senior citizens do it now. I only pay for outlets because I want them to be healthy and to continue publishing, and I don't personally care about some major city's establishment paper, and don't care whether it shuts down.