0
nigel99

Australian media law

Recommended Posts

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/thewest.com.au/technology/google/google-warns-australians-against-new-media-law-in-open-letter-ng-b881640853z.amp
 

From yesterday Google had a warning symbol and link to an article warning about the proposed change in the law. I don’t know what is driving the change perhaps trying to combat fake news?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/thewest.com.au/technology/google/google-warns-australians-against-new-media-law-in-open-letter-ng-b881640853z.amp
 

From yesterday Google had a warning symbol and link to an article warning about the proposed change in the law. I don’t know what is driving the change perhaps trying to combat fake news?

Nothing at all to do with fake news. Everything to do with forcing services that post links to news articles as part of their business model to sell advertising to share some of the cash with the news providers. Another attempt to do something about the current model that is forcing news providers to lay off reporters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

Nothing at all to do with fake news. Everything to do with forcing services that post links to news articles as part of their business model to sell advertising to share some of the cash with the news providers. Another attempt to do something about the current model that is forcing news providers to lay off reporters.

Yes If the International Confederation of Music Publishers  can protect music from unfair use and duplication so should journalists. Who investigate, publish and inform in the face of fake news and Facebook false dialogue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

Nothing at all to do with fake news. Everything to do with forcing services that post links to news articles as part of their business model to sell advertising to share some of the cash with the news providers. Another attempt to do something about the current model that is forcing news providers to lay off reporters.

Fuck yes.

 

I've been wishing for a law that forces media outlets to rename 'news' shows to 'opinion' shows if all they do is have pundits talking about journalism that other sources have gathered, and an independent body that licenses vets journalists and news outlets.

If you have people gathering information from first hand sources, report that information in a factual but unbiased way, and can cite the sources that's news. If you're talking about what you think that news means you're in an 'opinion' segment of the show.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
On 8/18/2020 at 4:47 PM, yoink said:

I've been wishing for a law that forces media outlets to rename 'news' shows to 'opinion' shows if all they do is have pundits talking about journalism that other sources have gathered, and an independent body that licenses vets journalists and news outlets.

If you have people gathering information from first hand sources, report that information in a factual but unbiased way, and can cite the sources that's news. If you're talking about what you think that news means you're in an 'opinion' segment of the show.

 

You'd put MSNBC out of business (and I would be delighted), but unfortunately, what you propose flies in the face of that pesky First Amendment. "It's difficult to have a marketplace of ideas when all the stores stock the same brand." - Mallard Fillmore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, markharju said:

You'd put MSNBC out of business (and I would be delighted), but unfortunately, what you propose flies in the face of that pesky First Amendment. "It's difficult to have a marketplace of ideas when all the stores stock the same brand." - Mallard Fillmore

Mallard Fillmore - a duck?  Related to Billvon, no doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, markharju said:

You'd put MSNBC out of business (and I would be delighted), but unfortunately, what you propose flies in the face of that pesky First Amendment. "It's difficult to have a marketplace of ideas when all the stores stock the same brand." - Mallard Fillmore

Ya, I'm with you and that Mallard the Duck guy. It is not the fault of the various medias that people choose poor sources of information.The law needs to be very light handed because it will inevitably be abused and used for even more censorship than we already have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Ya, I'm with you and that Mallard the Duck guy. It is not the fault of the various medias that people choose poor sources of information.The law needs to be very light handed because it will inevitably be abused and used for even more censorship than we already have.

Are you saying you have censorship in Canada?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
5 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Are you saying you have censorship in Canada?

Yes we do. Hate speech for instance. And personally I am just fine with it.

 

Edited to add: Ironic this "question" comes up on the day your government asks the Supreme Court to allow it to censor critics.

Edited by SkyDekker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Ken,

And what is worse is that they actually believe it.  :`(

Jerry Baumchen

One of the things I dislike about Australia is that we are a nanny state. As a general rule Aussie’s accept far more restrictions than other places I’ve lived

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
2 hours ago, nigel99 said:

One of the things I dislike about Australia is that we are a nanny state. As a general rule Aussie’s accept far more restrictions than other places I’ve lived

You should try Virginia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2020 at 2:24 PM, SkyDekker said:

Yes we do. Hate speech for instance. And personally I am just fine with it.

 

Edited to add: Ironic this "question" comes up on the day your government asks the Supreme Court to allow it to censor critics.

That question was for another poster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0