Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(The Verge)   Oh no Anyway   (theverge.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, Google, MySpace, Mass media, News Corporation, Names of large numbers, Usenet, Yahoo!, Facebook parent company Meta  
•       •       •

1772 clicks; posted to Business » on 24 Oct 2022 at 3:44 PM (14 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



16 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-10-24 3:02:08 PM  
Good. F*ck Zuckerturd. Hope it hits twitter just as hard. Double f*ck musky.
 
2022-10-24 3:55:10 PM  
Oh darn, if there were only another way to get the news. How much longer til FB becomes the next myspace? Or will it never since it keeps on buying what is popular to stay relevant.
 
2022-10-24 4:01:32 PM  

swaniefrmreddeer: Good. F*ck Zuckerturd. Hope it hits twitter just as hard. Double f*ck musky.


Nope, Canada is in the wrong here this is just protectionism. You should have to go to CBC.com or ctv or bumfarkontarionews.com to get THEIR ads and THEIR tracking cookies so they can in turn pay taxes to Canada.

Hint: Fark.com would be running afoul of the law too, it's just that no one cares because you're not going to extort a lot of money out of the site.
 
2022-10-24 4:29:05 PM  
Right wing "news" outlets will just offer their product for free, or a 10-year unlimited license to reprint articles on Facebook for $1 CAD.  Problem solved.
 
2022-10-24 4:35:29 PM  

SMB2811: swaniefrmreddeer: Good. F*ck Zuckerturd. Hope it hits twitter just as hard. Double f*ck musky.

Nope, Canada is in the wrong here this is just protectionism. You should have to go to CBC.com or ctv or bumfarkontarionews.com to get THEIR ads and THEIR tracking cookies so they can in turn pay taxes to Canada.

Hint: Fark.com would be running afoul of the law too, it's just that no one cares because you're not going to extort a lot of money out of the site.


News aggregators basically have a stream of free journalism that supports their business; those journalists are dying on the vine.
 
2022-10-24 5:14:53 PM  

swaniefrmreddeer: Good. F*ck Zuckerturd. Hope it hits twitter just as hard. Double f*ck musky.


ell, he'll go with 3
 
2022-10-24 5:28:28 PM  

Lexx: SMB2811: swaniefrmreddeer: Good. F*ck Zuckerturd. Hope it hits twitter just as hard. Double f*ck musky.

Nope, Canada is in the wrong here this is just protectionism. You should have to go to CBC.com or ctv or bumfarkontarionews.com to get THEIR ads and THEIR tracking cookies so they can in turn pay taxes to Canada.

Hint: Fark.com would be running afoul of the law too, it's just that no one cares because you're not going to extort a lot of money out of the site.

News aggregators basically have a stream of free journalism that supports their business; those journalists are dying on the vine.


Go look at a newspapers and see why journalism is dying. People stopped buying newspapers long before Google and Facebook news showed up, and it was because they were full of ads instead of news. This law is literally just 'you have to see our ads.'

News aggregators are just link aggregators, or in the case of Google News, their search engine limited to news websites. To read the news story, you have to go click on the link and get redirected to the original page. You will also however see that same story from 30 other sources and in the case of Fark, a discussion link. So if yours sucks, people won't go to it. That's the problem this law tries to solve. When users have choice they read somewhere else but the Canadian site that sucks still wants the ad impressions.

This isn't going to save journalism, but that's not the intention anyway.
 
2022-10-24 5:36:58 PM  
If you're getting your news from Facebook/Twitter/YouTube etc...
 
2022-10-24 6:11:48 PM  

Wireless Joe: Right wing "news" outlets will just offer their product for free, or a 10-year unlimited license to reprint articles on Facebook for $1 CAD.  Problem solved.


Yup, all the "reputable" sites are already paywalled
 
2022-10-24 6:13:18 PM  
And billionaires are surely happy to subsidize the news which benefits them
 
2022-10-24 6:34:47 PM  

SMB2811: Nope, Canada is in the wrong here this is just protectionism.


This isn't about protectionism, this is about copyright.

If you create content, and another entity distributes that content to everyone for profit, you should be entitled to a cut of those profits whether they did it with your permission or not.
 
2022-10-24 8:06:23 PM  

Ishkur: If you create content, and another entity distributes that content to everyone for profit, you should be entitled to a cut of those profits whether they did it with your permission or not.


Except this is how it usually goes:

News organization: "We demand payment for our content"
Distributor: "fark that. We'll just not carry your content then"
News organization: "Wait... no, not like that!"
<time passes>
News organization: "We demand that you carry our content and pay us for the privilege!"
Lawmakers: "Yeah, that totally makes sense!"
Distributor: "fark you and your country. We're out"
 
2022-10-24 9:04:49 PM  

SMB2811: swaniefrmreddeer: Good. F*ck Zuckerturd. Hope it hits twitter just as hard. Double f*ck musky.

Nope, Canada is in the wrong here this is just protectionism. You should have to go to CBC.com or ctv or bumfarkontarionews.com to get THEIR ads and THEIR tracking cookies so they can in turn pay taxes to Canada.

Hint: Fark.com would be running afoul of the law too, it's just that no one cares because you're not going to extort a lot of money out of the site.


WTAF
 
2022-10-24 9:23:34 PM  
But how are Canadians supposed to function, be it as individuals or as a nation, without Facebook there to tell them the latest stupid utterances from Kanye et al?
 
2022-10-25 1:09:28 AM  
This is why I get all my news from the only reputable source of note, InfoWars.

Open your eyes, Sheeptardos!!!!111!!!@
 
2022-10-25 6:01:27 AM  

trialpha: Ishkur: If you create content, and another entity distributes that content to everyone for profit, you should be entitled to a cut of those profits whether they did it with your permission or not.

Except this is how it usually goes:

News organization: "We demand payment for our content"
Distributor: "fark that. We'll just not carry your content then"
News organization: "Wait... no, not like that!"
<time passes>
News organization: "We demand that you carry our content and pay us for the privilege!"
Lawmakers: "Yeah, that totally makes sense!"
Distributor: "fark you and your country. We're out"


Times are changing. Check out Australia for a late example.
 
Displayed 16 of 16 comments

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.