Ted Cruz blows up Congress’ plan to save journalism by making Big Tech pay up
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Registered News organizations should get a "News" tag/icon and dinged every time they post non-factual content. Being "registered" is not with the govt, except for Radio and TV.
The content delivery system is required to provide a link to fact check summaries for each "News" organization which contains how many stories, which have been rated factual and which have not. I wouldn't mind a registration fee to pay for external fact checkers with a sliding scale based on the number of articles which fail fact checking. Make it cost to be a liar. Also, make timely corrections and never saying the same lie again reduce the fees, since even the best News teams get some facts wrong from time to time. As long as they are corrected and the incorrect things never repeated, the total cost of fact checking per year should be under $10M.
For registered News orgs that continue to lie, don't correct themselves, make the fees high and get higher for each lie. Alex Jones would have been fined out of existence years ago and never had any amplification of those lies as "news".
Everyone who doesn't register, is put into the "Satire/Comedy" tag/icon and is free to say anything they like.
Gee, did I find a use for the v-chip in TVs?
Update: s/New/News/
The content delivery system is required to provide a link to fact check summaries for each "News" organization which contains how many stories, which have been rated factual and which have not. I wouldn't mind a registration fee to pay for external fact checkers with a sliding scale based on the number of articles which fail fact checking. Make it cost to be a liar. Also, make timely corrections and never saying the same lie again reduce the fees, since even the best News teams get some facts wrong from time to time. As long as they are corrected and the incorrect things never repeated, the total cost of fact checking per year should be under $10M.
For registered News orgs that continue to lie, don't correct themselves, make the fees high and get higher for each lie. Alex Jones would have been fined out of existence years ago and never had any amplification of those lies as "news".
Everyone who doesn't register, is put into the "Satire/Comedy" tag/icon and is free to say anything they like.
Gee, did I find a use for the v-chip in TVs?
Update: s/New/News/
Upvote
-8
(3
/
-11)
To a degree. When voters feel disenfranchised, they tend not to vote. Gerrymandering increases a sense of "what is the point of me voting, it won't count". I might be pulling out of my nether reaches, but I think there have been some studies that show the greater the level of gerrymandering, the lower the gerrymandered party's voter turn-out in those districts.
I would imagine the effect is great enough on a state level to at least drive down total vote by a percentage point or two knowing human behavior.
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
I would expect that tech workers would understand how a proxy is used to conceal one's identity. When you have a strong relationship and can influence an organization to do your bidding because you share similar beliefs then you are in fact violating the 1st amendment by proxy. It's a loop hole for the ruling elite to basically get away with 1st amendment violations as 95% of the world now uses these platforms for communication. The fact that you have such a strong emotional reaction toward anyone who feels or thinks different than you is actually pretty disturbing. Are you really going to let Trump and Biden tear this country apart to the point of civil war? I mean 20 years ago half my friends were conservatives and the other half were liberals, i supported abortion and the 2nd amendment leaving me somewhere in the middle. I fully support the idea and intention of the 1st amendment, everyone should have their voice heard as long as it is not overtly abusive or intended physical harm. It's called being reasonable; you all need to step away from insanity.. you have let Trump and Biden's propaganda lead you towards normalizing hatred. At the end of the day 90% of liberals and conservatives are overwhelmingly wonderful people. Walk away from the hate, or lose your mind to oblivion. And remember, no one is coming to help us (Americans)... it's on us. We must turn our backs on hatred, all of us. You, me, and everyone around us. Godspeed
Upvote
-19
(1
/
-20)
Lol @ motherfuckin' Joe Biden being divisive. He's a very, very centrist old-fashioned politician. He's the white bread of politics, the Cheerios, the lukewarm water from a tap: he's fine! He's adequate! He's not toxic, and he won't hurt anyone, but he's sure not very exciting, not one way nor the other.
He's not extreme. At all. Not even a little bit. Anyone who thinks Joe Biden is in *any* way extreme shows just how much the Overton Window has moved to the right.
(You're not the only ostensible liberal who supports the 2nd amendment. I support the well-regulated part as well, though. I'm a gun owner and proud of it, but I'm not a goddamn death cultist. I live in a part of town where there's sometimes bears. I do have my CCW permit, but I generally don't carry, even though I have a permit. *and* once a day I bring 3-5k to the bank. Just, a) it's not my money, and b) if someone wants to rob me, they'll do it whether or not I'm carrying.)
Edit: you said "overtly abusive." Is "let's kill all the Jews" overtly abusive? Because that's legal. That's not against the law. The viewpoint of a lot of people is that *that's* not a bridge too far.
Upvote
17
(17
/
0)
You know what else doesn't really pay? The advertising on news searches.
If I search for say 'Cruz Journalism Google' I will find all sorts of links to news articles. You know what I won't see? Adverts.
If papers want to appear in search they can. If papers want to not appear in search they can. If papers want to appear in search and be payed for it ... well it doesn't seem anybody is interested in paying them.
Upvote
1
(3
/
-2)
The basic problem is that most people don't want to hear toxic maga b*llshit, so they have to legislate that eventuality. Sad pieces of sh*t.
Upvote
-1
(2
/
-3)
Reading that makes me think of the movie Billy Madison.
Billy Madison Movie":3h3s5qk5 said:
And I am still pissed the gubbermint is infringing upon my second amendment right to bear arms in the form of a tactical nuke or maybe anthrax. I can't even have a cluster bomb for cryin' out loud! No incendiary devices that could take out a square city block, no cruise missiles! If I want to own a claymore-style suicide vest and open carry it into the Supreme Court building, that should be my right, damnit!
Upvote
8
(9
/
-1)
Cruz's facial hair in the picture looks like a shared space. Every thing these people touch promotes hate, violence and misinformation. We keep talking about freedom of speech when we should be acting on the other end of the equation, the promotion of violence under it's banner.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
Cruz wins by more than "a point or two," though. The sad fact is he wins because a majority of Texans like him and what he stands for. Much like how the crueler DeSantis gets the higher his popularity, because he represents a cruel state full of cruel people.
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
To a conservative, the word "censor" means any attempt by the publisher to point out that a lie is in fact, a lie.
Upvote
11
(11
/
0)
You give them too much credit. These days, to the conservative mind, any time they aren't exempt from the rules it's because of censorship. If a "liberal" (i.e. anyone who disagrees with them) insults them they should be immediately censured. They, however, should be free to say or do whatever they want. When someone holds them responsible, it's not because they were a raging asshole who was acting like they were above the rules, it's because they were expressing conservative views. I don't quite understand how you get from one to the other, I live in a world where actions have consequences, but you can't deny the countless examples on display every day.
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
I am no fan of Ted Cruz, but good job killing it. Forcing companies like Google and Meta to send traffic to these sites and pay for the privilege through gun to head negotiations is probably unconstitutional.
It also does nothing about private equity companies etc buying up small newsrooms etc and laying off the staff.
What do you think they're going to do if this passes? Answer make sure their site qualifies for free money from Google and Meta.
If you want a healthier ad market undo some of the mergers that gave Google and Meta dominance.
It also does nothing about private equity companies etc buying up small newsrooms etc and laying off the staff.
What do you think they're going to do if this passes? Answer make sure their site qualifies for free money from Google and Meta.
If you want a healthier ad market undo some of the mergers that gave Google and Meta dominance.
Upvote
4
(5
/
-1)
[url=https://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=41215287#p41215287:ltyqbe6s said:
So if a government uses a private company as an intermediary to accomplish mass censorship, all is good?
Don't slow walk into China's social credit system.
Upvote
-18
(1
/
-19)
Too late, I can already downvote your post on Ars, a private website. Surely this is a slippery slope to government reeducation camps. /s
Upvote
18
(18
/
0)
Note: The above has not yet even remotely happened in the US outside of right-wing/hallucinogen-enthusiast fantasies.
Upvote
11
(11
/
0)
The political game aside, consolidation seems bad. If news become like under Spotify or Apple Music. Somehow they have to find a way as “small label” not by selling thru big label.
Upvote
-8
(1
/
-9)
I’ve been a rather dedicated fly fisherman throughout my life. That is an impressive wind knot you just got from your backcast.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
I do not like that man Ted Cruz
I do not like his far-right views
I do not like his stupid chin
I do not like his smarmy grin
I do not like him with a beard
I do not like him freshly sheared
I do not like Ted Cruz at all
That man Ted Cruz can suck my balls
I do not like his far-right views
I do not like his stupid chin
I do not like his smarmy grin
I do not like him with a beard
I do not like him freshly sheared
I do not like Ted Cruz at all
That man Ted Cruz can suck my balls
Upvote
17
(17
/
0)
I feel I have to say that I wouldn't let Ted Cruz anywhere near my balls, under any circumstances.
Upvote
12
(12
/
0)
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
At least credit John Oliver when you're going to steal his bit... Or more properly, some person on his staff.
Upvote
11
(11
/
0)
Ted Cruz is vile.
Unfortunately we'll be seeing this MAGAT in 2024, it should be quite the circus.
There will be a field of Trumpanziee's running, including King Louie...what a spectical it will be.
Unfortunately we'll be seeing this MAGAT in 2024, it should be quite the circus.
There will be a field of Trumpanziee's running, including King Louie...what a spectical it will be.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Nonsense; he's just the man to unite all Americans, whatever our creed, faith, or values, in the opinion that he's a creepy little fucker who eats his boogers.
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
"Code TC1" to let the fire department know it's just a Ted Cruz related false alarm?
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Subtly it has. In its most broad definition, censor means to suppress. The Trump administration collaborated with Fox News to suppress facts and create false scenarios. They censored their own viewers. No one complained of course, but if that point about censorship could be made, we might have some interesting conversations.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
I wasn't aware there were much of any small news rooms left. I thought they were all owned by 1 or 2 companies or newspapers. Our local news paper was recently acquired by USA Today I think . I don't consume any of it because it has all become clickbait desperate for dollars and I see the need for something to be done but damned if I know what (other than start with breaking up the huge conglomerates)
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Unfortunately, I don't think breaking up the huge conglomerates is going to help. Printing papers is expensive, and the conglomerates can at least help with bringing those costs down with economies of scale. However, they do expect a level of profit that many localities probably just cannot support, hence the issue with clickbait (printbait?).
There needs to be something done for local journalism. Done properly, it provides a sorely needed level of oversight on local government, coverage of issues of the area that wouldn't be touched by other media outlets, and helps the community keep in touch with each other. Unfortunately, there is no good business model for that anymore. Advertising revenues are close to non-existent. Putting stories behind a subscription means that only those who subscribe can get the information, and we've seen what happens when the quality journalism is behind a paywall, but the misinformation and conspiracy bullshit is freely accessible. And this bill also has serious issues.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
The thing is....a lot of news doesn't really need anything but a title. Like the Queen's death. Is anything beyond "Queen dies at [time] on [date]" really necessary for that piece of news? Sure, you can print a whole article under that title, going into details about the events preceding it, talking about her reign, details about her funeral, etc. But the entire story of the Queen's death is contained in the headline. Everything else is just information about related things. And frankly, none of it is very important to the average person.
I would consider the news that the Queen died valuable. But it's one-sentence news. And that can be read on an aggregator, so it doesn't make any money. Unfortunately, I can't see a solution to that problem.
Upvote
1
(4
/
-3)
Buy a subscription to the Tampa Bay Times. They are owned by the Poynter Institute and operate Politifact.com. They have won 14 Pulitzer Prizes. Obviously it's a local paper, but when you support them you are also supporting the other entities, besides, there is always Florida Man.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
TL;DR "OmG bOtH sIDeS aRE juSt aS bAd aS EaCh oTHeR!!1!1!"
Get the fuck out of here with your false-equivalence bullshit. You know damn well you're lying when you try to put Trump and Biden on equal footing.
Spoken either like a conservative who's trying to pretend conservatives aren't as bad as they really are, or someone who really has never met a single so-called conservative in the last 20 years or so.
But, my money's on it just a conservative bullshitter who thinks they're more logical and convincing than they really are.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
"Can't we all just get along? Why can't women, the browns, and the poors just keep to their place and behave?"
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
"Why can't the normals and the degenerates just be polite to each other?"
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
“but neither tech giant has yet found a perfect solution that would fairly compensate publishers and potentially help combat the mass shuttering of newsrooms across America.”
This often repeated line of “content aggregators should fairy compensate publishers” is as wrong as it is common. If anything, publishers should be paying content aggregators because content aggregators are handling the expensive and difficult problem of customer acquisition for free.
I’m not unsympathetic to their pain. And local news reporting is something important that we need to find a business model for. But the fact is that publishers business model was built on inefficiencies and geographic monopolies that the Internet revealed.
-There were many different newspapers across the country that were reporting the exact same news, which only worked because newspapers enjoyed local monopolies arising from the need to distribute physical newspapers every day.
-classified ads (one source of revenue) moved away from newspapers to Craigslist, eBay, etc far before google etc.
-most advertisers have found more effective places to advertise than alongside news content (YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, etc). Or they use sites that specialize in the “fun” newspaper content (lifestyle and sports). So most of traditional punishers old ad revenue isn’t even going to the aggregators, it’s going to user generated content platforms.
There’s more here, but those are some high points.
This often repeated line of “content aggregators should fairy compensate publishers” is as wrong as it is common. If anything, publishers should be paying content aggregators because content aggregators are handling the expensive and difficult problem of customer acquisition for free.
I’m not unsympathetic to their pain. And local news reporting is something important that we need to find a business model for. But the fact is that publishers business model was built on inefficiencies and geographic monopolies that the Internet revealed.
-There were many different newspapers across the country that were reporting the exact same news, which only worked because newspapers enjoyed local monopolies arising from the need to distribute physical newspapers every day.
-classified ads (one source of revenue) moved away from newspapers to Craigslist, eBay, etc far before google etc.
-most advertisers have found more effective places to advertise than alongside news content (YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, etc). Or they use sites that specialize in the “fun” newspaper content (lifestyle and sports). So most of traditional punishers old ad revenue isn’t even going to the aggregators, it’s going to user generated content platforms.
There’s more here, but those are some high points.
Upvote
1
(2
/
-1)
the issue is most of the people do not even know what ad blocker is ... we cannot leave that to the individual initiative.
if we keep feed people with bullshit since they are kids most of the people will grow up retarded.
It is well known nowadays that what we are exposed to shape our mind ... ads rapes our brains and that's a crime
what nazi fascism used to create consensus is used everyday by ads and now politics too.
that is mining the democracy at its own roots, we are free but fundamentally influenced by media so definitely not free at all but just zombies
Upvote
-3
(0
/
-3)