Having to pay to even link to news articles will only accelerate the downfall of journalism though. Instead of paying, why not just link to an AI generated article instead? Much needs to be done to save good journalism but this law is a massive step in the exact opposite direction
Comment on Canada says Google will pay $74 million annually to Canadian news industry under new online law
DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year agoNo it’s not.
The “open” Web desperately needs good quality journalism.
pajn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
An AI generated article would still need source material.
Anyway, what would be the appeal of a platform that couldn’t link anything but just showed AI content?
The way I see it, journalism is more or less dead. A shade of the former institution. There doesn’t seem many other ways to fund journalistic endeavour.
BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 1 year ago
“Journalism” has be dead for a long time. Just read up on what Hearst was doing in the 1800’s.
We’re just seeing the zombie grasping at everything it can.
Zak@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I agree that the decline of journalistic quality is bad for the world and would like a mechanism to improve it, but I have yet to read a convincing argument for why anyone should have to pay a fee to link to a news article. I could see an argument for reducing the amount of the content that can be republished as a preview under fair use, but nobody seems to want that.
DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Getting sick of saying that it’s not the link, it’s the preview.
Zak@lemmy.world 1 year ago
There are three things I don’t like about that argument.
festus@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
That’s not how the Canadian law was written. Google providing a link, even with no headline or preview, would still have to pay.