TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

An Update About Changes to Facebook’s Services in Australia

183 点作者 lunchbreak超过 4 年前

28 条评论

pawnednow超过 4 年前
Australian government and more specifically Rod sims, the chair of ACCC should get some counselling. Really good counselling. They clearly don&#x27;t understand how publishing works and have a biased understanding of who is benefitting from this relationship.<p>However, the entire Australian media has been nothing but puppets controlled by murdoch. The one true less biased source is ABC which has been muddied by constant federal government censorship and budget cuts almost to a point where independent journalism and Australia cannot be spoken in one sentence.<p>I hope they move forward with this code and I hope that both Google and FB remove news from their site so that newscorp can die quickly. It a shame they are doing this. Come next election I am voting against both SCOMO and the likes.
评论 #24337552 未加载
评论 #24337587 未加载
评论 #24337885 未加载
评论 #24337555 未加载
评论 #24337517 未加载
评论 #24337597 未加载
threeseed超过 4 年前
As I&#x27;ve mentioned before you only need to look at the fact that public and smaller news organisations e.g. ABC, SBS are not compensated to get an idea of the intention of this policy.<p>It&#x27;s purely to prop up News Corp which is struggling (16% loss in 2020 revenue) because of weak newspaper sales and Foxtel bleeding customers to Netflix, Disney etc.<p>And unfortunately just like in UK and US whenever Rupert Murdoch says jump you better say how high or else your government will go down in the next election.
评论 #24337562 未加载
评论 #24337374 未加载
评论 #24339402 未加载
abdulla超过 4 年前
Stratechery has a good analysis of the &quot;News Media Bargaining Code&quot;:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;stratechery.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;australias-news-media-bargaining-code-breaking-down-the-code-australias-fake-news&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;stratechery.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;australias-news-media-bargainin...</a>
评论 #24339457 未加载
julienb_sea超过 4 年前
As far as I can tell Facebook makes a good point. The Aus government designed heavy-handed regulation which clearly plays favorites and is totally one-sided. This is not behavior that we should tolerate. I absolutely support Facebook standing up for themselves here.
valleyjo超过 4 年前
I don’t like FB as a company. However I have to admit, they are correct that news organizations benefit the most from this relationship. Why doesn’t google do the same thing? Don’t index news sites. Googles response seemed less effective than FB’s.
评论 #24337702 未加载
评论 #24337615 未加载
评论 #24337540 未加载
paxys超过 4 年前
Regardless of politics, media and big tech dynamics, anyone who thinks that sharing links can or should be charged for just doesn&#x27;t understand the fundamental nature of the internet.
smcleod超过 4 年前
Somewhat related, from Daring Fireball&#x27;s clipping of <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;themargins.substack.com&#x2F;p&#x2F;facebook-the-pr-firm" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;themargins.substack.com&#x2F;p&#x2F;facebook-the-pr-firm</a>:<p>&gt; So, in that way, I read Facebook less as a tech company, but instead a communications one. Not a telecom communications, but more like a PR &#x2F; marketing consultancy. There’s nothing original about Facebook. It’s a company that hires people to build others’ ideas, and, more often than not, it does that better and faster than them too. And when it can’t do that, it just buys them outright. There is a lot of building, but the ideas are outsourced. But what Facebook is really good at is actually doing all this while fighting what seems to be a never-ending, at least since 2016 or so, PR battle while not giving an inch.<p>&gt; With all the negative press around, you might think they are not doing a good job at avoiding criticism, but consider the alternative that they’ve been able to weather all this because they’ve been able to deflect the criticism and avoid scrutiny and accountability. I know this all sounds pretty unhinged right now, but, stay with me. This is a company who hires conservative politicians to its highest ranks in multiple countries, while maintaining a veneer of political neutrality. The same company pretends its not the arbiter of truth while employing tens of thousands of people to do exactly that. Ask yourselves: What has changed at Facebook?
评论 #24337730 未加载
ryan-allen超过 4 年前
I&#x27;m no fan of the Murdoch media and the damage it has done to Australia in terms of our internet infrastructure, but if Facebook are to block news media from their platform it will not affect me in the slightest, I don&#x27;t trust _any_ of them to provide me the correct information.<p>I don&#x27;t trust Facebook to serve me news, and I don&#x27;t go there for news, and I don&#x27;t think anyone should go to Facebook (or Google) for news.<p>I don&#x27;t think Australians have a lot to lose from any big tech company blocking all news media on their platforms, and if they do so as a result of this legislation, and if it furthers the bleeding of these conglomerates, it sounds like a win&#x2F;win situation.<p>There are probably negative follow on effects I&#x27;m not considering, though.
评论 #24338818 未加载
throwaway13337超过 4 年前
Social media sharing helps accelerate the sensationalism of news. Which in turn has been creating very bad situations in our reality. Without social sharing of news, maybe it would be more tame.<p>The quality of discussions on those platforms would also very likely benefit.<p>Hopefully other laws are passed with similar responses from tech companies in other countries.<p>It would be a great sort of reverse-monkey-paw fate. The world could certainly use some good luck right now.
grecy超过 4 年前
It really does feel like Murdoch has reached Bond villain status with this one.<p>He&#x27;s has made the Australian government write a law that specifically and <i>only</i> targets two multi-billion dollar global companies (Facebook and Google) and forces them to give him more money.<p>It specifically isn&#x27;t going after other online companies that don&#x27;t have a huge net worth, and it specifically isn&#x27;t even attempting to hide the intent by also giving money to the not-for-profit news outlets in Australia (ABC, SBS).<p>Because he controls the very vast majority of media in Australia he can obviously force the government to do his bidding - one by ensuring all his government buddies stay rich, and two by promising not to publish anything that would result in them getting voted out.<p>A fiction writer couldn&#x27;t come up with such an outrageous idea.<p>As an Aussie, I can confidently say Australia has utterly lost the plot, and I applaud Facebook for standing up to them. I sincerely hope Google follow suit, and they both refuse to come back even if the legislation is scrapped. I hope News Corp. dies a rapid death without the 2.3B clicks
gonzo41超过 4 年前
If Facebook really wanted to fight the government it could unleash it&#x27;s democracy crippling social network to hurt this toxic government we have here in Aus. Wink wink Zuck.<p>But seriously this is just regulatory capture from News Ltd. Our Government works for them. Corruption is becoming a real and visible problem in Australia these days.
评论 #24337500 未加载
rhema超过 4 年前
This may not kill the large newspapers, but surely it will destroy the local newspapers. When does a tech blog become news? Can you even share anything on the internet through Facebook?
评论 #24337533 未加载
评论 #24337436 未加载
ropable超过 4 年前
Without reading the legislation in detail, I have to say that I&#x27;m inclined to just take the side of whoever News Corp is upset at.
评论 #24338180 未加载
wnbc超过 4 年前
If you are like me and wondering what the legislation draft is, please see<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.accc.gov.au&#x2F;focus-areas&#x2F;digital-platforms&#x2F;news-media-bargaining-code" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.accc.gov.au&#x2F;focus-areas&#x2F;digital-platforms&#x2F;news-m...</a><p>Some of articles discussing this topic do not provide a link to the the draft legislation source.
kevyin超过 4 年前
Nevermind the reasoning<p>If the result is no more&#x2F;fewer news on FB, doesn&#x27;t that mean it will be a more difficult platform for political parties and Rupert Murdoch&#x27;s of the world to manipulate?
评论 #24337590 未加载
评论 #24337581 未加载
Barrin92超过 4 年前
I haven&#x27;t followed this debate too closely but this seems pretty disingenuous.<p><i>&gt;The ACCC presumes that Facebook benefits most in its relationship with publishers, when in fact the reverse is true. News represents a fraction of what people see in their News Feed and is not a significant source of revenue for us</i><p>News may not directly contribute much ad revenue but it surely is a huge driver of engagement on the website, which in turn indirectly keeps people engaged with the facebook ecosystem at large. Political commentary involving news pieces certainly seems to be a feature on Facebook&#x27;s most popular pages.<p>Also I haven&#x27;t figured out yet what part of the law actually would imply that Facebook needs to blackout news wholesale. As I read it the law merely requires that Facebook negotiate with each publisher.
评论 #24337765 未加载
评论 #24337661 未加载
评论 #24337429 未加载
评论 #24337608 未加载
Wolfenstein98k超过 4 年前
Australian here... Not sure who to trust on this.
jb775超过 4 年前
This is a good thing. Media content quality has primarily been garbage the past 10+ years (and getting progressively worse), mostly due to the advertisement click-bait business model forced on them in order to survive. Social media kind of naturally fell into position to reap the benefits...they shouldn&#x27;t be the gatekeeper to news without paying a fair price.
harry8超过 4 年前
2 Points: Underscoring that facebook is not now, nor was it ever a good source of news is a very good thing. Don&#x27;t get your news from facebook. Don&#x27;t get it via facebook. Anything on facebook that isn&#x27;t actually personal is tainted and horrible to be treated with extreme suspicion. Facebook have earned that reputation and deserve it.<p>People going elsewhere on the internet than facebook to get news will reduce facebook engagment, use and get people in the habit of not going to facebook first.<p>Bring it on. Facebook are horrific. The less they do the better. Especially given they apparently won&#x27;t do anything about being used for violent organisation.<p>About the only organisation guaranteed to be more wrong than the Australian Government about literally everyting is Facebook.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.vox.com&#x2F;recode&#x2F;2020&#x2F;8&#x2F;28&#x2F;21406022&#x2F;facebook-banned-violent-militia-groups-kenosha-protests-jacob-blake-shooting-kyle-rittenhouse" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.vox.com&#x2F;recode&#x2F;2020&#x2F;8&#x2F;28&#x2F;21406022&#x2F;facebook-banne...</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2018&#x2F;11&#x2F;06&#x2F;technology&#x2F;myanmar-facebook.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2018&#x2F;11&#x2F;06&#x2F;technology&#x2F;myanmar-facebo...</a>
评论 #24337714 未加载
hcnews超过 4 年前
Why does the title say &quot;An Update About Changes to Facebook’s Services in Australia&quot; rather than &quot;Changes to Facebook’s Services in Australia&quot;? For me (2) is much more readable.
评论 #24337653 未加载
评论 #24340777 未加载
justsee超过 4 年前
This is the right move by Facebook (and Google) in the face of naked crony capitalism.<p>It&#x27;s an effort by the Morrison government to engage in rent-seeking on behalf of Rupert Murdoch&#x27;s News (which essentially operates as the communications arm of Morrison&#x27;s government), Nine (which held a fundraiser after the last national election for Morrison) and other media groups.<p>Yes, there are many valid criticisms of and concerns we should have with tech giants, but this proposed code doesn&#x27;t deal with any of those concerns.<p>Australia&#x27;s former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who has stepped up his war against Murdoch&#x27;s influence on Australian Democracy in recent years, was incredibly perceptive and scathing of this proposed code recently [1].<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=XiFTT_QgqIc&amp;feature=youtu.be&amp;t=351" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=XiFTT_QgqIc&amp;feature=youtu.be...</a>
xupybd超过 4 年前
Why are we getting hot by this in New Zealand? Last I checked we were autonomous from Australia and our only legal connections are treaties and the crown.
评论 #24337490 未加载
评论 #24337543 未加载
notbutreally超过 4 年前
How much do we have to pay Facebook to do this in the US?
arthens超过 4 年前
A week ago back some friends and I looked at the draft of the law... it&#x27;s honestly terrifying.<p>They basically want Google&#x2F;fb&#x2F;? to be upfront with all changes. The goal is clearly to give aussie media outlet an unfair advantage and let them use this information to manipulate the ranking algorithm and&#x2F;or bypass whatever restrictions are put in place. These info need to be &quot;in terms that are readily comprehensible&quot;.<p>IANAL, but here&#x27;s a few (reformatted) articles from the draft:<p>52M:<p>Google&#x2F;fb&#x2F;? will need to give aussie media companies access to:<p>- a list and explanation of the data that the digital platform service collects (whether or not it shares the data with the registered news business) about the registered news business’ users through their engagement with covered news content made available by the digital platform service;<p>- a list and explanation of the data that the digital platform service currently has a practice of making available to registered news businesses;<p>My interpretation: these companies will be required by law to share more user data than they currently do.<p>52N:<p>- if: changes are planned to be made to an algorithm of the digital platform service; and the changes are likely to have a significant effect on the ranking of the registered news business’ covered news content made available by the digital platform service.<p>- then: notice of the change is given to the registered news business corporation for the registered news business at least 28 days before the change is made<p>My interpretation:<p>The government wants aussie media companies to be able to be proactive and change their site&#x2F;service so that ranking changes are minimised<p>52O:<p>- if: the changes are specifically designed to have an effect on the ranking or display of content behind a paywall.<p>- then: notice of the change is given to the registered news business corporation for the registered news business; and the notice is given at least 28 days before the change is made;<p>My interpretation:<p>media companies don&#x27;t like when Google penalises paywalls. This will give them a 28 day window to change how they do paywall so that Google won&#x27;t be able to detect it. Like a whack a mole where you have to announce what you are about to hit<p>and this keeps going:<p>- 52P: 28 days notice for changes to how news items are displayed<p>- 52Q: 28 days notice for changes to advertising (if it affects news)<p>- 52S: media outlet must be able to moderate comments on their items (does that include comments on shared items? surely not?)<p>Draft: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.accc.gov.au&#x2F;system&#x2F;files&#x2F;Exposure%20Draft%20Bill%20-%20TREASURY%20LAWS%20AMENDENT%20%28NEWS%20MEDIA%20AND%20DIGITAL%20PLATFORMS%20MANDATORY%20BARGAINING%20CODE%29%20BILL%202020.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.accc.gov.au&#x2F;system&#x2F;files&#x2F;Exposure%20Draft%20Bill...</a>
评论 #24339748 未加载
chris_wot超过 4 年前
What I find funny about this reaction is that most Australians are actually either quite blase about this situation, or actually are quietly enjoying the fact that massive multinationals who will do anything to avoid paying taxes in Australia have finally discovered that their power is quite limited in Australia.<p>Most Australians have seen what Facebook was up to during the 2016 election. They have seen the rise of Trumpism and, despite the incredibly conservative government, don&#x27;t want that sort of crazy in their nation.
评论 #24338857 未加载
neximo64超过 4 年前
But not Whatsapp so no biggie.
chrismsimpson超过 4 年前
I am no fan of this right wing government, which is letting Fake News Corp write it’s media policy, but Facebook does not have an inherent right to other people’s content.<p>Rather than redistributing ad dollars away from big tech, this is likely to force people consuming news to go directly to the source. Either that or it will further dumb down our discourse (though Fake News Corp is doing a pretty good job of that anyway). Time will tell.
评论 #24337600 未加载
catmanjan超过 4 年前
As an Australian I have no doubt the policy is misguided, but the fact that these American companies are being so loud about it makes me wonder if the government is actually on the right track.<p>In general I would say whatever corporations want is not in my best interest, so whatever they don&#x27;t want, might be.
评论 #24337464 未加载
评论 #24337502 未加载
评论 #24337453 未加载
评论 #24337482 未加载
评论 #24337503 未加载
评论 #24338876 未加载
评论 #24337475 未加载