this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
37 points (93.0% liked)

CanadaPolitics

1873 readers
7 users here now

Placeholder for any r/CanadaPolitics refugees

Rules:

All of Lemmy.ca's rules apply

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It seems very obvious to me that social media is a net negative to media organizations. People very rarely click through to articles, headlines are clearly the most valuable part of an article.

Ultimately the way things work now is not sustainable it leads to low quality news that can barely stay afloat. How do you propose you fix it?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

headlines are clearly the most valuable part of an article.

Then there is no value at all. Views from an illiterate user have no value.

To fix the news industry media corps have to start doing quality work not click-bait, rage-trolling, opinion pieces. Once there is something worth reading maybe there will be a case for the extraction of value from links.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Thing is, it wasn't an issue on the web before social media. So now traditional media creates content that gets posted on social media, the eyes that see the content only sees it on social media with the ads that pay the digital media company, in the end the social media is richer, the traditional media is poorer and the user is stupider because they didn't bother actually reading the content.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

There 100% was link sharing with partial and full content being reposted long before "social media" arrived. "Tradidtional media" is only poorer in this current interaction because they produce such low quality content that it can be summarized in 5 words or less. If they wrote anything with depth they would have a real case for "social" platforms infringing on their copyright but you can only word a clickbait tittle so many ways and none of them are unique. Users aren't going to click through to a clearly dogshit article.

News sources need to quit cranking out click bait if they want to draw in real readers or, they can put their news behind a paywall and rely on subscribers to stay in business. If no one actually wants to pay for the "news" they produce then maybe they just suck, let them fail and something else will tke their place.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

A couple thousand people sharing and not reading the articles vs millions doing so?

Proof is in the pudding, traditional media have seen an increase in traffic since Facebook blocked them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Then keep blocking. There is no reason to set a precedent for one country saying what can and can not be linked without compensation. The blocking was done voluntarily by Alphabet and Meta and helps break up the monopoly they have on people's screen time.

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

It has to start somewhere though and the precedent was already set by Australia and Canada is totally free to force Meta to obey Canadian laws if it wants to offer its services in Canada and that means that the government absolutely can tell them "If you want to operate in Canada you have to allow your users to share Canadian media content."