this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2023
41 points (87.3% liked)

World News

32065 readers
960 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Canada's Heritage Minister redoubled her calls for Meta to end its ban on Canadian news content on Facebook and Instagram on Saturday as thousands of Canadians continued their rush to escape wildfires ravaging British Columbia and the Northwest Territories.

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are they not sending out emergency messages via the cell network? Is it not on local news and the radio? Doesn't YouTube have the ability to inject regional advertising? Are they not even putting up road signs mentioning the evacuation?

I don't get how it's Facebook's problem when not everyone has a Facebook account and there are many other (better) avenues.

Maybe I'm missing something about the infrastructure in more remote areas?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

These are the real questions that need to be asked. Using a social media platform from a company based in another country as your country's emergency news outlet is a big problem. Citizens using social media for news is another.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The Canadian government required that Facebook pay to link to news when they passed the Online News Act. Are they walking that back now? Or are they offering to pay those fees?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Of course not, it's clearly Meta's fault that Meta is obeying that law. Why would the negative consequences of that law be the fault of the people who passed the law in the first place?

I'm certainly not happy about all these wildfires, but I do have to admit to a certain amount of schadenfreude aimed at the government over how they so quickly illustrated just how dumb this law is.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I honestly don't get this thing about FB blocking news - it's because they are being forced to pay the news organisations, right? But why are they being forced to pay them - isn't it good for the news organisations to have their links appear on FB, so that people click those links, read their articles and see their ads?

I'm probably missing something, but I don't get it.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The Candian media wanted money. Thus a news link tax. (Australia tried the same thing, failed too.) But FB and Google called their bluff. Turns out FB and Google don't make money by linking to Canadian media, so they're happy to just delist those URLs.

The Canadian conservative politicians wanted the PR for attacking the evil US liberal tech giants. So they were willing to gamble, because they don't actually care about the media companies they claim to have been protecting.

Everything you wrote is true, but also traditional media is largely dying off these days. They're desperate for cash from anywhere.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Thanks, that's interesting.

It's a shame, because I really don't like FB much, and I would consider myself a supporter of traditional news media (quality stuff at least) - but here, I just can't see how they think they have a case.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Rupert didn’t fail. He got paid by Meta in Australia. It worked exactly as he had asked

Also .. are you ChatGPT because .. Canadas government is liberal

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You know the word "conservative" has other common meanings, right? But if you prefer, let's change it to "protectionist".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

We all know it means white supremacist neonazi these days

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

The Canadian conservative politicians wanted the PR

Wat? This was the Liberals that put this in.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

And I think that Club Penguin's block on news is keeping word from getting out