4 ms·
>Note, they don’t earn money from users. They earn money from advertisers. It doesn’t matter. They loose the audience - they loose advertising revenue. The onl
by ivan_gammel 1y ago
>Note, they don’t earn money from users. They earn money from advertisers.
It doesn’t matter. They loose the audience - they loose advertising revenue. The only difference is that UK cannot seize the money to collect the fine (the fine now is the price of the return ticket), but the fine wasn’t big anyway and complete loss of the market has bigger economic consequences. UK doesn’t have power over US corporation, but they have power over their distribution channel and they have full sovereign right to exercise that power.
- FabCH 1y agoThat assumes UK deploys technical measures to prevent their own citizens from accessing the website, which costs more political capital than fining a corporation. Or makes it illegal to access the site, which is even more unpopular. The difference is significant.
- ivan_gammel 1y agoRealistically, UK is a big market for 4chan, but is 4chan big enough for UK? What share of its 70M+ population will flip their vote because of this specific case? How many people will just switch to Reddit or something else and won’t even connect that block to any political party?
- hunterpayne 1y agoNo, it really isn't. Plus the free advertising this gets them will be worth more than any market other than the US.
- ivan_gammel 1y agoIf they hope that they will get more audience from elsewhere because of this, it certainly explains all the circus.