General > General Technical Chat

Is Google Australia Right or Wrong?

(1/7) > >>

leham:
So for those who don't know, the Australian government is wanting to push a new law to protect traditional media, basically they want big companies like google and apple to pay for news articles.

This is my understanding and breakdown of their blog post.

 
--- Quote ---Dear Australian creators and artists,
Firstly, thank you for everything you do to inform, entertain and inspire your audiences here and around the world. My primary focus is supporting you and your work to build a thriving creator ecosystem.
I’m writing today to make you aware of a proposed new law, known as the News Media Bargaining Code, that could have a significant, negative impact on the creator ecosystem in Australia.

There are several areas that deeply concern us about this proposed law because it prioritises the traditional news industry over smaller creators of content and the platforms where they find an audience. We are particularly concerned that it provides unfair advantages to large news businesses over anyone else online, including the very creators that make YouTube, YouTube:

* YouTube may be obligated to give large news publishers confidential information about our systems that they could use to try to appear higher in rankings on YouTube, disadvantaging all other creators. This would mean you could receive fewer views and earn less.

*It will create an uneven playing field when it comes to who makes money on YouTube. Through the YouTube Partner Programme, we already share revenues with partners who monetise on YouTube, including news publishers—and we are proud to support quality journalism. But through this law, big news businesses can demand large amounts of money above and beyond what they earn on the platform, leaving fewer funds to invest in you, our creators, and the programmes to help you develop your audience in Australia and around the globe.

*Under this law, big news businesses can seek access to data about viewers’ use of our products. YouTube believes user data protection is paramount and we should not be required to hand this data over.

The imbalances created by this proposed law could potentially affect all types of Australian creators, far beyond those who focus on news: from vloggers, to educational creators, to music artists and beyond. We are doing everything we can to push for changes and make sure YouTube in Australia remains a place where anyone can connect to an audience or build a business, not just a few large media companies.
--- End quote ---

Ok lets break it down..


--- Quote ---Dear Australian creators and artists,
Firstly, thank you for everything you do to inform, entertain and inspire your audiences here and around the world. My primary focus is supporting you and your work to build a thriving creator ecosystem.
--- End quote ---

We're ur friends, we always help remember ?!




--- Quote ---YouTube may be obligated to give large news publishers confidential information about our systems that they could use to try to appear higher in rankings on YouTube, disadvantaging all other creators. This would mean you could receive fewer views and earn less.
--- End quote ---

OK so last year youtube made a new rule to remove "fake news" ONLY "verified" news outlets could be allowed to create content on current events (news, disasters, some polotics ect). Youtube hides or removes videos they deem as "fake news", even if they are just discussion


--- Quote ---It will create an uneven playing field when it comes to who makes money on YouTube. Through the YouTube Partner Programme, we already share revenues with partners who monetise on YouTube, including news publishers—and we are proud to support quality journalism. But through this law, big news businesses can demand large amounts of money above and beyond what they earn on the platform, leaving fewer funds to invest in you, our creators, and the programmes to help you develop your audience in Australia and around the globe.

--- End quote ---

Not really, mainly due to their fake news policy, the news outlets already have little competition, this isn't going to completely flood everyone's feed, youtube is not a single file system, everyone is exposed to different content


--- Quote ---Under this law, big news businesses can seek access to data about viewers’ use of our products. YouTube believes user data protection is paramount and we should not be required to hand this data over.
--- End quote ---

This is the same data google sells to advertisers, they are probbaly upset because they would have to give it away for free. The word protection is a key word, this whole blog is basically gas-lighting or attempting to


--- Quote ---The imbalances created by this proposed law could potentially affect all types of Australian creators, far beyond those who focus on news: from vloggers, to educational creators, to music artists and beyond. We are doing everything we can to push for changes and make sure YouTube in Australia remains a place where anyone can connect to an audience or build a business, not just a few large media companies.
--- End quote ---

There is no explanation given by youtube here, does Allen Jones vlog?   



Here is the ACCC response, it's kinda funny as it shows how google where/is/are trying to manipulate their users.


--- Quote ---
Google will not be required to charge Australians for the use of its free services such as Google Search and YouTube, unless it chooses to do so.

Google will not be required to share any additional user data with Australian news businesses unless it chooses to do so.

The draft code will allow Australian news businesses to negotiate for fair payment for their journalists’ work that is included on Google services.

This will address a significant bargaining power imbalance between Australian news media businesses and Google and Facebook.

A healthy news media sector is essential to a well-functioning democracy.

We will continue to consult on the draft code with interested parties, including Google.


--- End quote ---


Just food for thought, google knew the law inside and out already, they write like they are but a humble little company trying to get by...



ataradov:
The arguments are rather irrelevant. Lawyers from both sides will make any arguments they can get away with to make their case.

The real point here is who really benefits from google indexing the articles for free. Google may see enough value in that and the new tax will just make margins smaller. In this case old news outlets will benefit from this.

Or Google may see not enough benefit even to cover the tax. In that case they may decide to provide the service at a loss, just to keep the customer in the ecosystem.

Or they may decide "screw you" and stop indexing the news. This will be the death of traditional media. And from what I can see, this is the most likely scenario.  This already happened in Spain (?) - Google just stopped indexing them. All the traditional media came crawling back asking to start indexing them again, since traffic dropped significantly.

fourfathom:

--- Quote from: ataradov on August 19, 2020, 12:15:04 am ---Or they may decide "screw you" and stop indexing the news. This will be the death of traditional media. And from what I can see, this is the most likely scenario.  This already happened in Spain (?) - Google just stopped indexing them. All the traditional media came crawling back asking to start indexing them again, since traffic dropped significantly.
--- End quote ---

So it seems that Google was providing a valuable service for the traditional media.  Perhaps the media should be paying Google?

ataradov:
Google would not want to charge them, since I doubt they even have enough money for Google to worry about.

But definitely "traditional media" thinks very highly of themselves. Where in reality their value is pretty low and some are downright parasitic. And real people don't care. Most of the time they just reprint the same reports. So in reality when I search for some event, I don't care where the story comes from. As long as Google indexes AP and other actual sources, I'm good. In fact, in most cases I don't want to see copy-paste of the same story from 100 "news" organizations.

coppice:
Both the media and Google are financed by ad revenue, and Google seems to be getting the lion's share right now. This is one of the key things which has lead the newspapers and other media to become purveyors of fake news, desperate to get any clicks they can. If we want the traditional media to be able to re-establish actual journalism we need something to change in their revenue sources. The fact that Google has stopped indexing in some places means very little. This is obviously what they would do in the short term as a negotiating ploy. Google needs news sources to get clicks. I don't know if the proposed move would be effective or would just backfire, but clearly the news business is just circling the drain right now.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod