Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   The case of Australia has shown us the truth about Facebook: Censoring content is only important to them if it's profitable   (washingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Human rights, Blasphemy, Censorship, Capital punishment, Freedom of speech, Government, Sharia, joint letter  
•       •       •

2001 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Feb 2021 at 2:31 PM (7 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



57 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-02-27 11:00:27 AM  
It's a business! Who knew?
 
2021-02-27 11:39:25 AM  
Facebook is a giant parasite.
 
2021-02-27 11:48:49 AM  
Hey WaPo!  Guess who else is pushing the 'big tech is evil' narrative?  Every right-wing rag on the planet. 

Do you wonder if a much bigger story could be found there?
 
2021-02-27 2:33:25 PM  
Duh?
 
2021-02-27 2:37:16 PM  
Facebook, a source of news??? Wheres Bender laughing even harder.  Delete facebook.
 
2021-02-27 2:37:43 PM  

DeathBySarcasm: Hey WaPo!  Guess who else is pushing the 'big tech is evil' narrative?  Every right-wing rag on the planet. 

Do you wonder if a much bigger story could be found there?


You know who else is?  Every progressive publication on the planet.
Do you wonder how big of a piece of shiat you have to be as a company to be hated by the full political spectrum?
 
2021-02-27 2:44:02 PM  
How exactly is news shared on Facebook?  Are people copying and pasting articles?  Is Facebook lifting articles and then promoting them without sending people to the source?  I don't use Facebook, so I'm just not getting how they're able to take articles and not pay the outlet they get it from.  It just seems like a similar thing to Metallica vs Napster, so I'm not sure how they get away with it.
 
2021-02-27 2:45:08 PM  

INTERTRON: You know who else is? Every progressive publication on the planet.
Do you wonder how big of a piece of shiat you have to be as a company to be hated by the full political spectrum?


News organizations reporting on Facebook refusing to be forced to pay news organizations, what a surprise they're all negative.
 
2021-02-27 2:48:14 PM  
facebook =/= news.
 
2021-02-27 2:48:15 PM  
Require social compatibility. User approved Links between platforms, or a platform platform that's independant.

I can email yahoo with google. I can call T-Mobile contacts with AT&T.
 
2021-02-27 2:50:20 PM  
There is no such thing as blasphemy.
 
2021-02-27 2:55:30 PM  
The biggest problem I have with Facebook is the algorithm. If you use Facebook you do not control what you see. Facebook decides what you see on that platform.

It's a big internet out there. Try googling (or if Google scares you, duckduckgo) something sometime and search on your own. Don't let Facebook decides what you see and do online.
 
2021-02-27 2:58:27 PM  

Vtimlin: Facebook, a source of news??? Wheres Bender laughing even harder.  Delete facebook.


Facebook is a medium like any other. If the NPR posted a link to Facebook is that now not news?
 
2021-02-27 3:02:12 PM  

Siskabush: The biggest problem I have with Facebook is the algorithm. If you use Facebook you do not control what you see. Facebook decides what you see on that platform.

It's a big internet out there. Try googling (or if Google scares you, duckduckgo) something sometime and search on your own. Don't let Facebook decides what you see and do online.


And every site linked into Facebook via shared logins or other means?
 
2021-02-27 3:07:15 PM  
Capitalism and authoritarianism always goes hand in hand, so it is not surprising.

pueblonative: And every site linked into Facebook via shared logins or other means?


And Google shared logins too.  Even worse are the websites that won't let people see the content without logging in to Google or Facebook first, so it means figuring out how to block the login overlays, or just give up and try different websites.
 
2021-02-27 3:08:07 PM  
Had it not been Facebook it'd have been Google with the 'STOP' button under hand. They are also all up in this.

Those laws never stood a chance.
 
2021-02-27 3:13:23 PM  

Jeebus Saves: How exactly is news shared on Facebook?  Are people copying and pasting articles?  Is Facebook lifting articles and then promoting them without sending people to the source?  I don't use Facebook, so I'm just not getting how they're able to take articles and not pay the outlet they get it from.  It just seems like a similar thing to Metallica vs Napster, so I'm not sure how they get away with it.


Person A is reading an online publication, thinks it is worth sharing on Facebook, taps the share  button embedded  in the article. Now everyone who follows Person A can read the article and then the article moves around in Facebook. The original online  publication misses out on any potential revenue while Facebook gets the lot.
 
2021-02-27 3:13:51 PM  

DeathBySarcasm: Hey WaPo!  Guess who else is pushing the 'big tech is evil' narrative?  Every right-wing rag on the planet. 

Do you wonder if a much bigger story could be found there?


The entire Facebook thing in Australia is a result of Murdoch trying to get a pay day after trying and failing repeatedly in competing with Facebook himself.
 
2021-02-27 3:14:20 PM  

PureBounds: Had it not been Facebook it'd have been Google with the 'STOP' button under hand. They are also all up in this.

Those laws never stood a chance.


Actually because of Zuckerberg's temper tantrum, 7 other countries and the eu are considering similar laws.
 
2021-02-27 3:17:21 PM  

pueblonative: PureBounds: Had it not been Facebook it'd have been Google with the 'STOP' button under hand. They are also all up in this.

Those laws never stood a chance.

Actually because of Zuckerberg's temper tantrum, 7 other countries and the eu are considering similar laws.


And they will get the same treatment. Taking away Facebook and/or Google is probably not great for someones electability. I am no expert though.

It shows how much power these companies really have. It's way too much, obviously.
 
2021-02-27 3:19:03 PM  
Didn't Google already do something like this in Spain that worked?
 
2021-02-27 3:19:19 PM  

NeoCortex42: DeathBySarcasm: Hey WaPo!  Guess who else is pushing the 'big tech is evil' narrative?  Every right-wing rag on the planet. 

Do you wonder if a much bigger story could be found there?

The entire Facebook thing in Australia is a result of Murdoch trying to get a pay day after trying and failing repeatedly in competing with Facebook himself.


Profit is one angle, but 'Big Tech' being on the frontlines of fighting Murdoch's propaganda machine is another.
 
2021-02-27 3:20:53 PM  

PureBounds: pueblonative: PureBounds: Had it not been Facebook it'd have been Google with the 'STOP' button under hand. They are also all up in this.

Those laws never stood a chance.

Actually because of Zuckerberg's temper tantrum, 7 other countries and the eu are considering similar laws.

And they will get the same treatment. Taking away Facebook and/or Google is probably not great for someones electability. I am no expert though.

It shows how much power these companies really have. It's way too much, obviously.


Sure they will.  Zuckerberg's not gonna piss billions of dollars away in international profits just for what amounts to a rounding error. Also you may want to poll because the Australians seem to be more outraged by Zuck and he's gone back to negotiations.
 
2021-02-27 3:21:30 PM  

I'm no expert but...: Jeebus Saves: How exactly is news shared on Facebook?  Are people copying and pasting articles?  Is Facebook lifting articles and then promoting them without sending people to the source?  I don't use Facebook, so I'm just not getting how they're able to take articles and not pay the outlet they get it from.  It just seems like a similar thing to Metallica vs Napster, so I'm not sure how they get away with it.

Person A is reading an online publication, thinks it is worth sharing on Facebook, taps the share  button embedded  in the article. Now everyone who follows Person A can read the article and then the article moves around in Facebook. The original online  publication misses out on any potential revenue while Facebook gets the lot.


User name checks out.
 
2021-02-27 3:23:09 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


Hmmm...
 
2021-02-27 3:23:52 PM  

PureBounds: Didn't Google already do something like this in Spain that worked?


Back in 2014. World has changed.
 
2021-02-27 3:24:51 PM  

I'm no expert but...: Person A is reading an online publication, thinks it is worth sharing on Facebook, taps the share button embedded in the article. Now everyone who follows Person A can read the article and then the article moves around in Facebook. The original online publication misses out on any potential revenue while Facebook gets the lot.


The above scenario is at least reasonable. However, Australia's law wanted Facebook to pay news organizations if users so much as linked to them.

This entire situation is:

Australia: "If you're going to link to news organizations, you have to pay for it"
Facebook: "Okay, we'll stop linking to news organizations then"
Australia: *apoplectic rage*
 
2021-02-27 3:27:59 PM  

Jeebus Saves: How exactly is news shared on Facebook?  Are people copying and pasting articles?  Is Facebook lifting articles and then promoting them without sending people to the source?  I don't use Facebook, so I'm just not getting how they're able to take articles and not pay the outlet they get it from.  It just seems like a similar thing to Metallica vs Napster, so I'm not sure how they get away with it.


Somebody copies a URL into their shared post, so their followers can see it.

Facebook's tech takes the headline, maybe a primary image, and maybe a snippet of the text - the  publisher can control how this happens, and many news companies optimize their webpages for consumption on Facebook.

A person that wants to read more can click the link, which takes them to the website of the publisher. If the publisher has ads on their site, they earn ad revenue.


Basically, even though Facebook and Google drive a ton of traffic to news organizations' websites, the publishers also want to force Facebook and Google to pay to link to their content.
 
2021-02-27 3:30:07 PM  

trialpha: INTERTRON: You know who else is? Every progressive publication on the planet.
Do you wonder how big of a piece of shiat you have to be as a company to be hated by the full political spectrum?

News organizations reporting on Facebook refusing to be forced to pay news organizations, what a surprise they're all negative.


Not that surprising, considering Facebook is bad.
 
2021-02-27 3:33:02 PM  

trialpha: I'm no expert but...: Person A is reading an online publication, thinks it is worth sharing on Facebook, taps the share button embedded in the article. Now everyone who follows Person A can read the article and then the article moves around in Facebook. The original online publication misses out on any potential revenue while Facebook gets the lot.

The above scenario is at least reasonable. However, Australia's law wanted Facebook to pay news organizations if users so much as linked to them.

This entire situation is:

Australia: "If you're going to link to news organizations, you have to pay for it"
Facebook: "Okay, we'll stop linking to news organizations then"
Australia: *apoplectic rage*


Totally agree.
 
2021-02-27 3:42:38 PM  

trialpha: I'm no expert but...: Person A is reading an online publication, thinks it is worth sharing on Facebook, taps the share button embedded in the article. Now everyone who follows Person A can read the article and then the article moves around in Facebook. The original online publication misses out on any potential revenue while Facebook gets the lot.

The above scenario is at least reasonable. However, Australia's law wanted Facebook to pay news organizations if users so much as linked to them.

This entire situation is:

Australia: "If you're going to link to news organizations, you have to pay for it"
Facebook: "Okay, we'll stop linking to news organizations then"
Australia: *apoplectic rage*


Except for the fact they blocked organizations that clearly would not fall under news media code.
 
2021-02-27 3:58:30 PM  

INTERTRON: trialpha: INTERTRON: You know who else is? Every progressive publication on the planet.
Do you wonder how big of a piece of shiat you have to be as a company to be hated by the full political spectrum?

News organizations reporting on Facebook refusing to be forced to pay news organizations, what a surprise they're all negative.

Not that surprising, considering Facebook is bad.


Not surprising considering Facebook enabled genocide in Myanmar.
 
2021-02-27 4:15:06 PM  
1. Facebook blocks content not allowed in Pakistan. Facebook is giving in.
2. Facebook blocks content not allowed in Australia. Facebook is fighting.

Huh?
 
2021-02-27 4:17:14 PM  

WelldeadLink: 1. Facebook blocks content not allowed in Pakistan. Facebook is giving in.
2. Facebook blocks content not allowed in Australia. Facebook is fighting.

Huh?


They're back at the negotiating table in Australia.
 
2021-02-27 4:17:19 PM  

pueblonative: Except for the fact they blocked organizations that clearly would not fall under news media code.


That might be incompetence, as opposed to maliciousness. I recall seeing a statement saying it was accidental and would be (or was) corrected.
 
2021-02-27 4:29:22 PM  

WelldeadLink: 1. Facebook blocks content not allowed in Pakistan. Facebook is giving in.
2. Facebook blocks content not allowed in Australia. Facebook is fighting.

Huh?


I see you've played blocky-fighty before!
 
2021-02-27 4:30:53 PM  
International corporations existing to make money whether or not it pleases the natives has been going strong since 1600.
 
2021-02-27 4:35:51 PM  

NM Volunteer: Capitalism and authoritarianism always goes hand in hand, so it is not surprising.

pueblonative: And every site linked into Facebook via shared logins or other means?

And Google shared logins too.  Even worse are the websites that won't let people see the content without logging in to Google or Facebook first, so it means figuring out how to block the login overlays, or just give up and try different websites.


Yes! Let me just say I farking LOATHE this trend of "log in through a third party." So great, now if my Facebook account is compromised, so are half my logins. Why does no one farking see this?!
 
2021-02-27 4:40:11 PM  

GranoblasticMan: NM Volunteer: Capitalism and authoritarianism always goes hand in hand, so it is not surprising.

pueblonative: And every site linked into Facebook via shared logins or other means?

And Google shared logins too.  Even worse are the websites that won't let people see the content without logging in to Google or Facebook first, so it means figuring out how to block the login overlays, or just give up and try different websites.

Yes! Let me just say I farking LOATHE this trend of "log in through a third party." So great, now if my Facebook account is compromised, so are half my logins. Why does no one farking see this?!


"If"?  It's always a "when".  Always.
 
2021-02-27 4:40:22 PM  

trialpha: pueblonative: Except for the fact they blocked organizations that clearly would not fall under news media code.

That might be incompetence, as opposed to maliciousness. I recall seeing a statement saying it was accidental and would be (or was) corrected.


Yeah, they also blocked the entirety of some news website Facebook pages instead of just the Australian postings.  When they were notified of the issue, they corrected it.  They're initial blocking of news stuff was pretty haphazard.
 
2021-02-27 4:44:41 PM  
Honest Government Ad | News Corp Bargaining Code
Youtube uqj2z3QaRyU
 
2021-02-27 4:51:21 PM  
DeathBySarcasm:

Guess who else is pushing the 'big tech is evil' narrative?

People who haven't been in a coma for the last 30 years?
 
2021-02-27 5:20:39 PM  

PureBounds: Had it not been Facebook it'd have been Google with the 'STOP' button under hand. They are also all up in this.

Those laws never stood a chance.


Google and Facebook both caved and have set up direct payment to the news companies in Australia.

Google caved first because Microsoft stepped in and said if Google doesn't want Australia's money then Bing will be happy to oblige, and Facebook caved when Canada and several EU countries decided to pour salt in the jar Russia keeps his balls in.
 
2021-02-27 6:02:12 PM  

Murkanen: PureBounds: Had it not been Facebook it'd have been Google with the 'STOP' button under hand. They are also all up in this.

Those laws never stood a chance.

Google and Facebook both caved and have set up direct payment to the news companies in Australia.

Google caved first because Microsoft stepped in and said if Google doesn't want Australia's money then Bing will be happy to oblige, and Facebook caved when Canada and several EU countries decided to pour salt in the jar Russia keeps his balls in.


If so, they are going to regret it, not a good precedent to set. Microsoft is at fault here. Now totalitarian bullshiat like the australian government think it's open season, eventually that cost is going to go to the customers, you and me, and we will end up paying for it, again.
 
2021-02-27 6:15:15 PM  

GranoblasticMan: NM Volunteer: Capitalism and authoritarianism always goes hand in hand, so it is not surprising.

pueblonative: And every site linked into Facebook via shared logins or other means?

And Google shared logins too.  Even worse are the websites that won't let people see the content without logging in to Google or Facebook first, so it means figuring out how to block the login overlays, or just give up and try different websites.

Yes! Let me just say I farking LOATHE this trend of "log in through a third party." So great, now if my Facebook account is compromised, so are half my logins. Why does no one farking see this?!


For the same reason a depressing number of folks I know think online voting is an idea whose time has come.

People are farking goofy, y'all.
 
2021-02-27 6:29:18 PM  

PureBounds: Murkanen: PureBounds: Had it not been Facebook it'd have been Google with the 'STOP' button under hand. They are also all up in this.

Those laws never stood a chance.

Google and Facebook both caved and have set up direct payment to the news companies in Australia.

Google caved first because Microsoft stepped in and said if Google doesn't want Australia's money then Bing will be happy to oblige, and Facebook caved when Canada and several EU countries decided to pour salt in the jar Russia keeps his balls in.

If so, they are going to regret it, not a good precedent to set. Microsoft is at fault here. Now totalitarian bullshiat like the australian government think it's open season, eventually that cost is going to go to the customers, you and me, and we will end up paying for it, again.


Encouraged negotiation followed by arbitration is authoritarianism.  Now tell me your theories about taxes and theft.
 
2021-02-27 6:31:57 PM  
PureBounds:

Microsoft is at fault here.

Why?  Google could have stuck to its guns and cut off Australia, but chose not to when a competitor stepped in to say they'd be happy to take Google's share of the pie too.
 
2021-02-27 6:33:06 PM  
It's a farking private company. It's not farking censorship, you twats. If I point a gun at you and tell you to shut up or I'll blow your head off, that's censorship. If I tell you to shut up or I'll summon men with guns to throw you in prison, that's censorship. But it's not censorship when I tell you to shut up or I'll ask you to leave my property (or platform). You may think it's unfair, but for fark's sake it's not censorship!!!
 
2021-02-27 7:06:53 PM  

Brynden Rivers: It's a farking private company. It's not farking censorship, you twats. If I point a gun at you and tell you to shut up or I'll blow your head off, that's censorship. If I tell you to shut up or I'll summon men with guns to throw you in prison, that's censorship. But it's not censorship when I tell you to shut up or I'll ask you to leave my property (or platform). You may think it's unfair, but for fark's sake it's not censorship!!!


Wrong thread.
 
2021-02-27 8:17:38 PM  
Aussie Gov: Facebook must pay our news organizations for links!
Facebook: Ok, we won't allow any links from anything possibly covered by this new law.
Aussie Gov: wait no aggh
 
Displayed 50 of 57 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.