Google News app and the Chrome browser app on android devices both open up the original site when you click on a news item, that is they take you to the television channel web site, newspaper website etc. When you get to the website that is where you may or may not encounter a pay wall barrier.
The same thing happens if you navigate to the news media website from another browser, for example Opera, Duck, Firefox.
1 Like
I say good riddance to news pushing and copying on Google, Facebook, et al. Most of it is not factually correct, or just opinion, or just promotion tending to blatant clickbait. Much of what I see shared is disinformation supporting posters confirmation biases.
When I want information and news I go to or subscribe to REAL sources. I find that ABC, Guardian, The Conversation, and most of the time The Age are good. And of course Choice online.
3 Likes
“The Conversation” has an interesting article this morning.
One of the key points has been mentioned above and remains quite relevant - what becomes of Facebook if it has no credible news sources? it is already perceived (?) to host a significant amount of fake news …
The morning ‘Conversation’ email adds a bit more context …
So Facebook is playing hardball. Rather than accept an ACCC bargaining code that might see it pay some media organisations for some content, it says it plans to ban Australian news from Instagram and Facebook. The move comes on the heels of a Google campaign warning Youtube and its search engine are under threat from regulatory overreach.
We’ve seen this before – the platforms have responded the same way to attempts at regulation in other parts of the world. Both have legitimate concerns about the ACCC bargaining code and zero compunction about throwing their weight around.
But also consider this: just a couple of weeks ago global human rights group Avaaz released a report which claimed misleading health advice about coronavirus on Facebook had racked up an estimated 3.8 billion views. It found the misinformation published by Facebook reached four times as many eyeballs as content they published from credible sources such as the WHO. The deluge of dodgy information on Facebook is almost certainly contributing to misinformed people making poor personal decisions. Most probably it is costing lives.
In such circumstances Facebook might ponder whether wall-to-wall QAnon is such an appealing notion. And in the meantime, the wisdom of Facebook Australia and New Zealand MD Will Easton telling Australian journalists their work doesn’t bring much value to his company (and is only a “fraction” of the clearly misnamed “News Feed”) brings to mind the old line about not upsetting anyone who buys ink by the barrel.
Besides, as Rob Nicholls from the UNSW business school writes today , the negotiating tactic could backfire. “Can you imagine Instagram or Facebook without the ABC or Australian news sources? How are you going to share interesting information with family and friends without being able to put links into posts?”
Misha Ketchell
Editor & Executive Director
If nothing else it all looks set to be an interesting ride …
6 Likes
Having watched & read the discussions on various media, it appears that advertising is not the key for the online juggernauts. They really don’t make much money from it, and they feed the media organisations a huge volume of traffic they might not otherwise have. The juggernauts make their money off the data obtained from out behaviour on their platforms. They use this to build up comprehensive pictures of our interests, wants, behaviours etc. This is then fed into their algorithms to serve us with information, ads, etc, tailored to us, including predictive advertising. This is where their income is generated.
If they stop the news feeds, it will mean that users cannot cite sources of information, and as a consequence disinformation will abound because they don’t have the same rigour about knowing the validity of source material.
We the everyday users will be the collateral damage that none of the parties (online juggernauts, Government, & Murdoch) really care about in Murdoch’s scramble to retain market share.
It’s not clear that this is the intended or sole purpose of the regulation nor the real cause of the back lash.
Some perceive Murdoch’s interests to be mounted on a tall pedestal. Compared to the might of Face-plant and Bog-gle etc the Murdoch empire is far from the same reach and influence globally. More locally unless Murdoch chooses to move to a non subscription service, the only custom following that tilt at the windmills will be those prepared to pay to ride the same horse, or follow on the donkey. 
I’ll stick to the ABC assuming they are not cut to incapacity, and the other few independent bastions of good reporting. I’ve survived not being on Facebook, fallen out with LinkedIn for its breeches and deceptions, and could learn to live without Google.
Google is not the only font of internet knowledge or misdirection. Many web resources I use can be connected to by directly typing the web address. Not that different to the old days when dial up was actually that. Phone a computer and hanging on for the high speed experience of 1200bps or worse 120/300baud Viatel. Even Combank offered such wonderful connectivity. Long distance STD costs extra. 
1 Like
This story is one long and sometimes laborious read, but seems well thought out, reasonably well presented, and plausible. A few typos in the way, but forgive him. Note that it is an independent analysis and not a research project or focused study.
1 Like
Advertising and specifically personalised advertising from the data collected from searches, likes and clicks is very important to the juggernauts. This is one of the principle pillars of these organisations and a part of the core revenue stream for their businesses.
The more data they collect, including what news preference one has, the more valuable their data sets become as they can use their algorithms to try and match advertising to particular user’s preferences making the success of the advertising greater.
There is much written about the financial benefits of collecting and analysing user data.
The author experience with the Google News App (or Google News app in the US) is different to what is experienced and reported by a number of community members (including me). When a news headline is clicked, the content from the news agency appears within the Google News App and not within a non-Google platform. While the news content may be from the news agency website, the hosting platform for reading isn’t (namely… news content from publisher websites appears within the mobile app). Maybe this has changed since the article was authored.
The crux of the argument may be hidden in the wording…
Having a news aggregator also might be important as a defensive strategy against the disruption of Google’s digital advertising business on news publisher sites. Other news aggregator services that would move news content from publisher websites into some mobile app that would show add directly in the app could mean less revenue for Google.
The other point yet to be made is that newspapers (news media) sells advertising to make money and not news stories. They are treating on the toes of the big platforms as they are also in the business of selling advertising…both competing for the limited advertising market.
If they are now not running advertisements also reduces the revenue ability the news agencies would otherwise have, that being advertising broadcast in news content on their own website. Google actions are in effect squeezing the news agency revenue juices from duplicating content through their own platform.
1 Like
I would take with a grain of salt predictions of how things might be in a range of future hypothetical scenarios.
Hopefully if GaF are unwilling or unable to provide news or news links any more … people might just exercise their brains only a tiny bit and directly visit the real web sites of the underlying news organisations.
Social media is already awash with BS and that isn’t going to change either way.
Via subscriptions newspapers do sell news stories to make money. Their revenue is a mix of advertising sales and subscription sales. The problem is that advertising sales revenue is plummeting faster than subscription sales are rising. Advertising sales revenue has been plummeting for a long time, largely due to the wider disruption of the internet, and only more recently due to the fact that GaF are now sucking up such a large percentage of the advertising spend.
2 Likes
The subscriptions, like selling the print, creates some revenue but can’t be relied upon to keep a news agency afloat. If the news agencies relied on subscriptions/print copy revenue only, they would no longer be in business.
4 Likes
Almost smells like capitulation, but …
7 Likes
Google parent Alphabet reported a net profit of US$34.3 billion on revenue of almost US$162 billion last year.
(From the linked news release.)
4 Likes
With Showcase in mind & I haven’t read the whole thread so excuse if already put forward, but…
“Google has threatened to withdraw its search product from Australia as a worst case scenario if the code goes ahead”…
So “worst case”, maybe unlikely BUT if they do pull Search altogether, will Android phone & Google smart home device owners have scope to claim a refund for … not fit for purpose or the like 
2 Likes
& if Search was to go & the close knit integration with Maps & reviews, could be some truth in this https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/jobs-on-line-google-search-003025489.html
No. Because a) you paid $0 to use Google Search b) Google Search is (presumably) not required for successful operation of any paid-for Google devices (certainly not for an Android phone).
c) The situation with an Android phone is more complex because the phone is not (typically) made by or sold by Google. You may more typically have bought a phone that is made by e.g. Samsung and that phone runs an operating system that is supplied by Google, or at least the core of it is supplied by Google, before e.g. Samsung customizes it or packages it. So straight off the bat there is some finger pointing. However if you bought a, for example, Google Pixel then ignore point c) but see point b).
Were Google to have a total dummy spit and disable all Google devices and services in Australia, including paid-for devices and services then in my opinion there would be a class action in the US before you can say “ambulance chaser”. I don’t think Google will do this.
There’s a certain amount of posturing and positioning in the negotiation going on. Google wouldn’t even need to withdraw Search. They just need to ensure that it does not list any search results that link to relevant news sites. They may have to withdraw Search temporarily in order to comply with that but I don’t expect they make a lot of money from linking to news sites anyway because the money is in something that they can advertise i.e. that people buy i.e. that advertisers are prepared to pay for.
2 Likes
… I don’t think most people realize quite what carnage and chaos this would cause, including people in the Australian government.
However wouldn’t it be great. A country completely free of the Google-borg. 
1 Like
Some?
Of course Google Search is not essential for Android or Gmail or … it’s really only a feature available as an add in to any one of several web browsers.
Google might shoot itself in the foot if it shut down more than Google Search. EG Google Maps. The status of Crome might be uncertain, but it is not unique.
P.S.
I’m a little frivolous as we’ve avoided the Goggle-Sphere with the exception of the Android TV.
Google can uninstall Crome, wipe all G-mail, and shut down Android. Farewell to Google Maps. The Qld Government may find it’s add in of Qld Globe to Google Earth a little painful though. Ouch!
1 Like
That’s commendable but have you noticed how many web sites would break? (I activated my version of “Pi hole” but targeting only google stuff and was shocked by some web sites that broke totally unexpectedly.)
How many people, companies even, are using 8.8.8.8 as DNS server?
Google docs?
2 Likes
It is available browser based which has a GIS backend…
A little clunky, but works.
But, they do say it runs best on Chrome.
4 Likes
Thank you both; I didn’t know about it.
3 Likes
Dr Shumi Akhtar, an associate professor at the University of Sydney Business School’s Discipline of Finance, penned this article in the Sydney Morning Herald.
Possibly the actions of Australia is a different tact to that of the US and EU, attempts to unwind the almost monopolies created by Google and Facebook. It can be seen why these companies object strongly to Australian laws, and also objecting with actions in the US and EU.
1 Like
