Government departments have people whose job it is to analyze what editorial pages and websites are saying about them, then prepare a daily brief and send it to the minister.  I suspect the government is noticing smaller and medium sized media outlets blasting them over their handling of this.  I think that is was has motivated them, not a willingness to bow down to the tech giants.

I wish politicians of all parties would become more tech literate before trying to legislate or comment on this stuff.  Pierre Poilievre took to Twitter recently to scold the government that community NEWSPAPERS like Durham RADIO in Oshawa were already feeling the effects of C-18.  
He's not ready.  Nice contact lenses though.
 

Last edited by Tomas Barlow (July 11, 2023 12:12 am)

I was listening to a late night show on AM640 while walking the dog at 1 AM (long story, but he wants to go out late) and they had an expert on about this. I didn't catch his name, but I did catch his point. He said the biggest mistake the federal government made was doing this thing backwards. They made the law, then they started negotiating with Google and Meta. 

He suggested that it's usually done the other way around, so they could formulate the law in a way that would not lead to an impasse. He insisted the government was being bull headed when it came to C-18, and was only interested in having it its own way, consequences be damned.

Unfortunately for them - and Canadians - it seems to have backfired in that sense. 

I thought it was an interesting point and I think he was right.

unclefester wrote:

RadioActive wrote:

The biggest mistake the federal government made was doing this thing backwards. They made the law, then they started negotiating with Google and Meta. 

It's usually done the other way around, so they could formulate the law in a way that would not lead to an impasse, insisting that the government was being bull headed when it came to C-18, and was only interested in having it its own way, consequences be damned.

Unfortunately for them - and Canadians - it seems to have backfired.
  
I think he was right.

Of course your gentleman expert is right

The Trudeau government

Pathetic

Embarrassing

And the other guy doesn’t know the difference between a newspaper and a radio station. That’s just as pathetic and embarrassing.

Didn't Trudeau liken the C-18 battle to the World War 2 fight for democracy?

He makes my skin crawl

What a drama Queen 

RadioAaron wrote:

He may not know that Durham doesn’t publish an actual physical newspaper, but that’s immaterial to the argument.

You cleverly left out a word to make him sound less stpupid.  "He may not know that Durham RADIO doesn’t publish an actual physical newspaper."

Not knowing what you're talking about is pretty material.  If Trudeau came out and said the Toronto Star is a great radio station and Google needs to pay up to protect it, would anyone say that was immaterial?  Would Poilievre?  Not a chance.  Everyone would call him incompetent.  Poilievre is all outrage with no substance.  This is a stupid bill but no one in Ottawa is equipped to protect the media because they don't understand it.  Not even the CRTC.  At least this government is trying to do something.  Poilievre wouldn't.  He hates the media and avoids reporters like the plague.  He'd defund the CBC and call it a day.
 

Last edited by Tomas Barlow (July 11, 2023 11:40 pm)

Tomas Barlow wrote:

RadioAaron wrote:

He may not know that Durham doesn’t publish an actual physical newspaper, but that’s immaterial to the argument.

You cleverly left out a word to make him sound less stpupid.  "He may not know that Durham RADIO doesn’t publish an actual physical newspaper."

Not knowing what you're talking about is pretty material.  If Trudeau came out and said the Toronto Star is a great radio station and Google needs to pay up to protect it, would anyone say that was immaterial?  
 

You called the website I linked to a radio station. Take a look at that website....is the analog equivalent of it
a) a radio station or,
b) a newspaper?

Durham radio is running a product that is essentially a digital newspaper
 

RadioActive wrote:

Back to the main subject, it now appears Meta has decided it doesn't care what changes are made to C-18, it's going to block Canadian news on its sites regardless.

Ottawa’s bid to bring Facebook onside on Bill C-18 not enough to stop it blocking news
https://clearthis.page/?u=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-ottawas-bid-to-bring-facebook-onside-on-bill-c-18-not-enough-to-stop/

Meanwhile, it appears a growing number of Canadians are turning to alternates like Duck Duck Go, my personal favourite search engine, since it makes a point of not tracking its users. 

“We’ve definitely seen an increase in browser installs and searches out of Canada over the last few weeks,” said spokesperson Allison Goodman. “Since we don’t track our users, we can’t say or approximate how many new users that might be.” 

DuckDuckGo.com

What's funny is that DuckDuckGo, or Bing, or whoever also aren't going to pay for links.

And I don't think it was expected the Meta was going to change anything. They didn't even try to intervene like Google did. News links just aren't as important to them as they may be to Google. They're also worried about the liability of setting global precedent.

RadioAaron wrote:

Tomas Barlow wrote:

So why are you in support of two companies that have shown that they feel that they're unaccountable to any laws in any country?  You might dislike Trudeau but don't you think your own industry should have a fighting change against foreign companies that have decimated the advertising market in this country? 

I know you're not going to answer again, but which law(s) specifically are they not following?
 

Not going to answer? Of course I am.
I guess you haven’t been following the news for the last decade. Many countries have found large tech companies to be in violation of antitrust laws, data protection laws, and privacy rules.
People on this forum prefer to cheer for that type business over the industry they built their careers in because of their hatred for Trudeau. It’s bizarre.
Hating a politician more than you like your own industry is not healthy.

Last edited by Tomas Barlow (July 12, 2023 2:51 pm)

I disagree with you, RadioAaron, but still appreciate your advice that pushed me into purchasing two Sonos Move speakers. ;-)

Some feedback on the matter of tech giants hacking and slashing at the income of legitimate journalists, around the world, is warranted. Where better to find said advice that from Australian Rod Sims, a professor at Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University? He was previously Chair of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

His July 11, 2023 opinion piece:

Google Search and Meta’s Facebook both benefit hugely from news media content.

Imagine a Google search to answer queries on everything from Canadian public policy, to what is happening with COVID-19, to the latest sporting results if news media content could not be accessed. Likewise, those relying on Facebook’s newsfeed (or “feed” as it is now called) without it containing any news.
News media content is essential for the full service needed to keep you on these platforms so they can advertise to you, which is how they make their enormous profits.

Canada recently passed a law (Bill C-18) that would require Google and Meta to pay news media businesses for the content used. It is similar to the News Media Bargaining Code (NMBC) passed by the Australian Parliament in February 2021. The NMBC’s objective was to address the massive imbalance in bargaining power between Australia’s news media businesses and the platforms. It required the parties to negotiate and, failing agreement being reached, arbitration would settle the appropriate payment.

This imbalance means commercial deals cannot be done to achieve fair payment for the benefit the platforms gain from news media content. The outcome is that less journalism can be afforded. Journalism benefits society in many ways, even for those who do not access it, as it holds the powerful to account, provides a journal of record and is a forum for ideas.

Australia’s NMBC has been extremely successful. From not being able to engage with the platforms the Australian news media businesses now have deals they are comfortable with, and these deals are yielding well over $200 million (Australian) per annum to the news businesses. Google has done deals with essentially all eligible media businesses, while Facebook did deals with news media businesses employing more than 85 per cent of Australian journalists.

Once the NMBC became law there was a 46 per cent increase in job ads for journalists, and many say there has never been a better time to be a journalist in Australia. Guardian Australia, for example, increased its staff by around 50 per cent.

Google and Meta have said, in response to Bill C-18 passing, that they will no longer show Canadian news in Canada. This is similar to threats they made in Australia. Indeed, Google threatened to remove Google Search from Australia completely, and Facebook actually took down all news and more for around a week. Both threats and actions were ultimately withdrawn after some small changes of no consequence to Australia, but which seemed to matter to the two platforms.

Hopefully there will now be an outcome that can see Canadian media appropriately compensated. It may be helpful to mention two differences between the Canadian and Australian laws.

First, Bill C-18 automatically designates Google and Facebook. In Australia, designation depended on whether Google and Facebook had done commercial deals with Australian media. Google and Facebook did not want to be designated for their own reasons and so did many great deals quickly in ways that completely achieved the goals the government, and the media, had for the NMBC. It was not the threat of arbitration that brought them to the table, but the threat of designation.
Second, the Australian NMBC says that if Google and Meta decide not to show news on their platforms then they cannot show any news at all from anywhere. In this context, it would mean that if Google and Facebook remove news it would not just be news focused on a Canadian audience but all news from anywhere in the world however targeted. That is, they cannot discriminate against Canadian-focused publishers. The Canadian government has the power to address this point through regulation, and I would encourage them to do so. The penalty of removing news would then so much larger for the platforms.

Canadian news media businesses need to be appropriately compensated for their content. The current situation is untenable. To its great credit the Canadian government recognizes this and the crucial role it must play on behalf of the future of journalism in Canada.

SOURCE - https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2023/07/11/news-media-content-is-essential-for-meta-and-google-platforms.html