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.

(Yahoo)   Facebook threatens to remove news from its platform if Congress passes a proposed media law. Oh no. Where will our drunk uncles get their current events knowledge now?   (finance.yahoo.com) divider line
    More: Spiffy, Mass media, Journalism, government report, News Media Alliance, Facebook parent Meta Platforms Inc, U.S. Congress, annual defense bill, American Civil Liberties Union  
•       •       •

391 clicks; posted to Business » on 06 Dec 2022 at 6:15 AM (16 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



28 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-12-06 4:45:36 AM  
This won't effect Fox or NewsMax
 
2022-12-06 5:08:42 AM  
Please proceed.
 
2022-12-06 5:17:22 AM  
That's not a threat. It's a benefit.
 
2022-12-06 7:07:01 AM  

bostonguy: That's not a threat. It's a benefit.


bostonguy: Please proceed.


I agree, I stopped using FB the day the Cambridge Analytica went public.  I don't miss it at all.
 
2022-12-06 7:17:22 AM  
An anti-trust exemption for the dreck we're swimming in?  No thanks.  I'm with the ACLU on this one.
 
2022-12-06 8:08:15 AM  
I don't think I've ever looked to Facebook for any type of news.
 
2022-12-06 8:16:01 AM  
Meaning what? CNN and the like won't have an account any more? Or people can't post links to news sites?  Who will decide what's a news site?  Is your shiatty blog news or not? Are tweets news?
 
2022-12-06 8:16:35 AM  
Hopefully that ends the "MMA Fighting News" suggested articles it insists I'd be interested in.
 
2022-12-06 8:32:15 AM  
Best news of the day so far.
 
2022-12-06 8:38:34 AM  
I fail to see the downside here.
 
2022-12-06 9:00:55 AM  
Wait, they're going to get rid of the actual news... but keep the drunk uncle posts "telling the truths the media won't to real 'Muricans"

Not sure that's a win
 
2022-12-06 9:08:17 AM  
All the more reason to pass it.
 
2022-12-06 9:51:06 AM  
wow, ya mean they would actually have to pay the creators for the content they benefit from?  such a novel concept.
 
2022-12-06 10:30:06 AM  
Bigots will still be free to share the racist movies they bought on Amazon.
 
2022-12-06 10:31:32 AM  
This is just what the lizardpeople wanted
 
2022-12-06 10:37:34 AM  

Incog_Neeto: This is just what the lizardpeople wanted


Just the sort of accusation a Freemason would say.
 
2022-12-06 11:05:35 AM  
Serious question: This proposed media law affects more than FaceBook, correct? Would it also impact posting links to news on Fark? How does it affect other platforms that curate links to news, host automated news feeds, and/or have users contribute links to news?
 
2022-12-06 11:06:19 AM  
"I will shoot this briefcase of my own money if you don't let me keep it" is a hell of a strategy, Zuck. I think lil dude has spent too much time as a floating homunculus sprite in his barren VR chat world nobody wants. Here's hoping he loses it all and degenerate MAGA uncles the world over lose access to realpatrioteagleflaghumpernews.info.
 
2022-12-06 12:16:10 PM  
Geez, why can't people just stick to the initial mission of FB? Stalking exes and people out of your league, as Farkerberg intended?
 
2022-12-06 12:52:59 PM  

LucyBrew: Serious question: This proposed media law affects more than FaceBook, correct? Would it also impact posting links to news on Fark? How does it affect other platforms that curate links to news, host automated news feeds, and/or have users contribute links to news?


No.  Facebook includes a preview of the story.  So, people are skipping clicking, but getting information without any revenue from ads going to the new outlet.  Posting a link with a custom headline that takes you to the story wouldn't require payment.
 
2022-12-06 12:54:32 PM  

Glorious Golden Ass: So, people are skipping clicking, but getting information without any revenue from ads going to the new outlet.


I'm just glad that I frequent a site where everyone reads the articles before they comment.
 
2022-12-06 1:23:02 PM  
Yes, truly a dark day for people too lazy to search for an actual news website.
 
2022-12-06 1:26:59 PM  
"Dumb farks."

~Mark Brisketberg
 
2022-12-06 1:33:25 PM  

Spawn_of_Cthulhu: Meaning what? CNN and the like won't have an account any more? Or people can't post links to news sites?  Who will decide what's a news site?  Is your shiatty blog news or not? Are tweets news?


The quick and dirty summary of the proposed law is that the social media companies have to pay the news companies for every link of a news story posted on the social platforms.
 
2022-12-06 1:42:01 PM  

bostonguy: Glorious Golden Ass: So, people are skipping clicking, but getting information without any revenue from ads going to the new outlet.

I'm just glad that I frequent a site where everyone reads the articles before they comment.


Whoops.
 
2022-12-06 1:56:08 PM  

dsmith42: Spawn_of_Cthulhu: Meaning what? CNN and the like won't have an account any more? Or people can't post links to news sites?  Who will decide what's a news site?  Is your shiatty blog news or not? Are tweets news?

The quick and dirty summary of the proposed law is that the social media companies have to pay the news companies for every link of a news story posted on the social platforms.


So, join social media sites you don't like and make bots that post news stories constantly until those sites go bankrupt?
Got it.
This can't possibly backfire.
 
2022-12-06 7:12:33 PM  
This sounds like Facebook's reaction to a similar law being prepared in Australia, and in their magnificent competence they managed to take out:

- most, but not all news sites
- several state health departments in the middle of pandemic lockdowns
- pages for a number of charities, including women's shelters
- the leader of a major state political party's official election campaign page, but not that of the leader of the other major state political party. (The election result was a record-breaking landslide, and this is unlikely to have moved the needle, but still, holy shiat you dickwits.)

We don't need Facebook to stop linking to or start paying for news. We need it to die in a farking fire.  Then try, convict, and hang by the neck until dead any survivors from its board and C-level pour encourager les autres.
 
2022-12-07 2:45:03 AM  

Glorious Golden Ass: LucyBrew: Serious question: This proposed media law affects more than FaceBook, correct? Would it also impact posting links to news on Fark? How does it affect other platforms that curate links to news, host automated news feeds, and/or have users contribute links to news?

No.  Facebook includes a preview of the story.  So, people are skipping clicking, but getting information without any revenue from ads going to the new outlet.  Posting a link with a custom headline that takes you to the story wouldn't require payment.


Isn't the preview that they provide the content of an open-graph tag embedded by the story's author explicitly for the purpose of presentation on external websites?
 
Displayed 28 of 28 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.