The proposed News Media Laws

[twentyforty]

IMHO Facebooks core business is collecting consumers and profiling them with the view of selling access to a qualified group of consumers depending on what it is you’re selling. It acts as intermediary , while guarding its valuable consumers from open access by its customers, the sellers. Facebook has amassed its 2.2b consumers through providing news in its various forms. It needs news for consumer recruitment and retention but it is not its core business.

Umm, Facebook hasn’t amassed 2.2b people by providing news. That’s a fallacy. Facebook doesn’t need news at all. Facebook has amassed 2.2b people by providing a platform were the people (users) are the content. It enables people to interact with each other and to share their lives, interests, stories and views with each other. News is something the news media corporations put on Facebook voluntarily to reach a greater audience.

The true meaning of news is different from your interpretation. It is basically information that is new. It may be in the form of gossip, a weather report, informative interaction with its consumers, a murder in your suburb and as you say sharing of each other’s lives. Regardless of what form it takes, people have a thirst for information that they don’t already have, it’s called news. And this is why people find FB useful. If it’s core business was developing a platform, then it’s been done. If it’s core business was maintaining a platform then who pays them to maintain it? No sir, it’s core business is and always has been putting people in groups and charging for limited access. Have you ever looked at the dossier they have on you?

 

[mike]

IMHO Facebooks core business is collecting consumers and profiling them with the view of selling access to a qualified group of consumers depending on what it is you’re selling. It acts as intermediary , while guarding its valuable consumers from open access by its customers, the sellers. Facebook has amassed its 2.2b consumers through providing news in its various forms. It needs news for consumer recruitment and retention but it is not its core business.

Umm, Facebook hasn’t amassed 2.2b people by providing news. That’s a fallacy. Facebook doesn’t need news at all. Facebook has amassed 2.2b people by providing a platform were the people (users) are the content. It enables people to interact with each other and to share their lives, interests, stories and views with each other. News is something the news media corporations put on Facebook voluntarily to reach a greater audience.


The true meaning of news is different from your interpretation. It is basically information that is new. It may be in the form of gossip, a weather report, informative interaction with its consumers, a murder in your suburb and as you say sharing of each other’s lives. Regardless of what form it takes, people have a thirst for information that they don’t already have, it’s called news. And this is why people find FB useful. If it’s core business was developing a platform, then it’s been done. If it’s core business was maintaining a platform then who pays them to maintain it? No sir, it’s core business is and always has been putting people in groups and charging for limited access. Have you ever looked at the dossier they have on you?

Advertisers pay to show their advertisements. That’s who pays for it. Simple. It has nothing todo with journalists or news media corporations. In your interpretation of news the people are the news. As I said Facebook does not need the news media corporations. The 2.2b users are there because they generate the content that others want to see which allows advertising.

I think you are off track in terms of this thread and the news media deals associated with new laws. News in this context is news generated by news media corporations or news businesses.

 

[twentyforty]

IMHO Facebooks core business is collecting consumers and profiling them with the view of selling access to a qualified group of consumers depending on what it is you’re selling. It acts as intermediary , while guarding its valuable consumers from open access by its customers, the sellers. Facebook has amassed its 2.2b consumers through providing news in its various forms. It needs news for consumer recruitment and retention but it is not its core business.

Umm, Facebook hasn’t amassed 2.2b people by providing news. That’s a fallacy. Facebook doesn’t need news at all. Facebook has amassed 2.2b people by providing a platform were the people (users) are the content. It enables people to interact with each other and to share their lives, interests, stories and views with each other. News is something the news media corporations put on Facebook voluntarily to reach a greater audience.


The true meaning of news is different from your interpretation. It is basically information that is new. It may be in the form of gossip, a weather report, informative interaction with its consumers, a murder in your suburb and as you say sharing of each other’s lives. Regardless of what form it takes, people have a thirst for information that they don’t already have, it’s called news. And this is why people find FB useful. If it’s core business was developing a platform, then it’s been done. If it’s core business was maintaining a platform then who pays them to maintain it? No sir, it’s core business is and always has been putting people in groups and charging for limited access. Have you ever looked at the dossier they have on you?

Advertisers pay to show their advertisements. That’s who pays for it. Simple. It has nothing todo with journalists or news media corporations. In your interpretation of news the people are the news. As I said Facebook does not need the news media corporations. The 2.2b users are there because they generate the content that others want to see which allows advertising.

I think you are off track in terms of this thread and the news media deals associated with new laws. News in this instance is news generated by news media corporations or news businesses.

You’re talking about news which is generated by professional journalists etc. Why would that be of benefit to a social platform?
It’s enhanced content and professionally written. Sure some of it is gossip and opinion but it is professionally presented by those who have access and the skill to investigate.
If you asked yourself honestly why you are a member of fb, Twitter or even this forum the answer would be the same. You come on hear for news and sharing of ideas/opinions. But it’s the news which is the big bait. When an insider like the Pom delivers the news you are more accepting as opposed to say, me giving you my opinion?
Mike, if you think fb was created purely for members to enjoy chatting then you’re being naive. I agree with you, that the members are doing some heavy lifting by creating much of the news stories, but the main game is reaching out to a very large number of qualified prospects to sell something. An idea, a new potato peeler, a political point of view, whatever you want to sell. That’s where fb makes more than 90% of its revenue and that’s why it is it’s core business.

 

[mike]

IMHO Facebooks core business is collecting consumers and profiling them with the view of selling access to a qualified group of consumers depending on what it is you’re selling. It acts as intermediary , while guarding its valuable consumers from open access by its customers, the sellers. Facebook has amassed its 2.2b consumers through providing news in its various forms. It needs news for consumer recruitment and retention but it is not its core business.

Umm, Facebook hasn’t amassed 2.2b people by providing news. That’s a fallacy. Facebook doesn’t need news at all. Facebook has amassed 2.2b people by providing a platform were the people (users) are the content. It enables people to interact with each other and to share their lives, interests, stories and views with each other. News is something the news media corporations put on Facebook voluntarily to reach a greater audience.


The true meaning of news is different from your interpretation. It is basically information that is new. It may be in the form of gossip, a weather report, informative interaction with its consumers, a murder in your suburb and as you say sharing of each other’s lives. Regardless of what form it takes, people have a thirst for information that they don’t already have, it’s called news. And this is why people find FB useful. If it’s core business was developing a platform, then it’s been done. If it’s core business was maintaining a platform then who pays them to maintain it? No sir, it’s core business is and always has been putting people in groups and charging for limited access. Have you ever looked at the dossier they have on you?

Advertisers pay to show their advertisements. That’s who pays for it. Simple. It has nothing todo with journalists or news media corporations. In your interpretation of news the people are the news. As I said Facebook does not need the news media corporations. The 2.2b users are there because they generate the content that others want to see which allows advertising.

I think you are off track in terms of this thread and the news media deals associated with new laws. News in this instance is news generated by news media corporations or news businesses.

You’re talking about news which is generated by professional journalists etc. Why would that be of benefit to a social platform?
It’s enhanced content and professionally written. Sure some of it is gossip and opinion but it is professionally presented by those who have access and the skill to investigate.
If you asked yourself honestly why you are a member of fb, Twitter or even this forum the answer would be the same. You come on hear for news and sharing of ideas/opinions. But it’s the news which is the big bait. When an insider like the Pom delivers the news you are more accepting as opposed to say, me giving you my opinion?
Mike, if you think fb was created purely for members to enjoy chatting then you’re being naive. I agree with you, that the members are doing some heavy lifting by creating much of the news stories, but the main game is reaching out to a very large number of qualified prospects to sell something. An idea, a new potato peeler, a political point of view, whatever you want to sell. That’s where fb makes more than 90% of its revenue and that’s why it is it’s core business.

I’m not entirely disagreeing with you. However news content from news media corporations is not needed by Facebook. That’s not what Facebook is about. It really adds very little value when it can be obtained from other sources. Despite your assurances most of it is crap anyway and not very professional. I always try and go to the source and that isn’t a journalist. Have you every had a paper publish something about you, your company or a family member. If you have you will know just how distorted the news media is. It’s whatever spin they can put on it that is more likely to attract readers and hence advertisers. It mostly has very little todo with facts. There are of course exceptions but that’s what they are exceptions, they are rare.

I’ve exactly asked myself why I am on Facebook and it had absolutely nothing todo with news content generated by news media corporations. I am there to keep in contact with my relatives and friends who live in different states and on various different continents on this planet. I am also there to discuss and learn about things that interest me. I am able to discuss and chat with like minded individuals and experts in a particular field that I would otherwise never have a chance to meet.

All of my ‘friends’ are there for similar reasons.

Facebook generates revenue from my interactions by showing me advertising. It’s really not that hard to understand.

 

[Geo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDcJRqKFY7I&fbclid=IwAR3JtTZCMXKA47NShD3XvoudDSChLksmBgGMxqkfIsaQkTLYPp8oo4pLurg

PG Version

 

[Tiger5150]

It is so much easier to regulate a newspaper or tv channel with domestic legislation, compared to these global monopolies.

That's the part I don't know if folks really understand. The legislation appears to be less about "copyright" protection and more about managing monopolies.

The whole point of the ACCC finding is that Google and Facebook have developed themselves into a position where they monopolise things like ad revenue, media distribution etc.

I see all these comments saying "too bad, that's business", but that's such a naive position to take regarding emerging / entrenched monopolies.

Tax their revenue then, a bit like GST but more like the NSW gaming machine tax. Do that for every organisation that has multi billion dollar revenue, not just ones you don’t like.


What part of their revenue, *earned within Australia*, is not taxed? If my company places an ad/adwords/targetted marketing on Google or Facebook, I pay GST.

Yes but your company can offset that GST tax by the GST on purchases. You only actually pay the difference. That’s why I said more like the NSW gaming machine tax. It’s based on pure revenue and there are no offsets. Straight up tax on revenue received by the company.


Mike with respect, thats not how corporate tax works. No company in Australia pays tax on revenue. All revenue is offset by cost of goods sold, in effect company tax is tax on gross profit. Effectively the same as GST.

Google & Facebook, like any other company trading within Australia, pay GST on ***all*** of their sales which is ***ONLY*** offset by purchases of goods and services ***purchased in Australia*** so its a pretty good mechanism to get tax out (or at least money returned to the Aus economy) of a massive international company like FB/Google because they obviously have all of their international companies set up at a gross loss.

I know that’s not how it works now but neither is taxing hyperlinks. I know many companies set themselves up for gross loss.

I havent really been following this direct issue as closely as I should but is the intention to TAX Google/FB or force them to pay content creators?

But instead of changing the way the Internet works how about we fix the real tax issue instead.

Always room for real tax reform as long as it improves productivity. **I am NOT a fan of taxing companies or industries differently though**. Make one (set of) law and tax everyone the same.

Edit: But clubs and pubs in NSW pay tax now on gaming machine revenue, not profit or loss.

Because it is a ***State tariff*** and forms part of costs of goods sold and in effect is a deduction for **Federal** Company Tax

But that’s exactly what these laws are trying to do to Facebook and Google.

As I’ve repeated here many times before Google and Facebook don’t need news media content. That’s not how they generate revenue. Facebook and Google don’t publish the news media content the news media corporations do. In fact Facebook currently without news content is a much more appealing place to be.


Genuinely interested in the answer, does the legislation tax them or force them to pay content creators?

It’s not a tax in the traditional sense, but it is a charge overseen by a government body.

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;page=0;query=BillId:r6652%20Recstruct:billhome

It is supposed to be a negotiation with the news media businesses.

The ACCC will be responsible for administrating and enforcing the code.

There is no definition in the code of how much a news media business can charge.

It only takes effect for news media businesses whose revenue exceeds $150K pa which cuts out many of the independents.

There is also no clear definition of what a news media business is or what a journalist is. It was left out of the final version.

There is no clear definition of what news is either, or what constitutes news content.

Large organisations such as News Corp or the Nine media organisation have an unfair advantage in negotiations over smaller news media organisations. There will be no consistency based on actual news content. Ie how much per item etc.


OK, so not a Tax in any sense (modern or traditional).

It is a tax though in the sense of a forced charge by a government body, just using another mechanism.

Edit: maybe I should say it’s like a tax though in the sense of a forced charge by a government body, just using another mechanism.

Does the government get the money? It’s not a tax.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

IMHO Facebooks core business is collecting consumers and profiling them with the view of selling access to a qualified group of consumers depending on what it is you’re selling. It acts as intermediary , while guarding its valuable consumers from open access by its customers, the sellers. Facebook has amassed its 2.2b consumers through providing news in its various forms. It needs news for consumer recruitment and retention but it is not its core business.

Umm, Facebook hasn’t amassed 2.2b people by providing news. That’s a fallacy. Facebook doesn’t need news at all. Facebook has amassed 2.2b people by providing a platform were the people (users) are the content. It enables people to interact with each other and to share their lives, interests, stories and views with each other. News is something the news media corporations put on Facebook voluntarily to reach a greater audience.


The true meaning of news is different from your interpretation. It is basically information that is new. It may be in the form of gossip, a weather report, informative interaction with its consumers, a murder in your suburb and as you say sharing of each other’s lives. Regardless of what form it takes, people have a thirst for information that they don’t already have, it’s called news. And this is why people find FB useful. If it’s core business was developing a platform, then it’s been done. If it’s core business was maintaining a platform then who pays them to maintain it? No sir, it’s core business is and always has been putting people in groups and charging for limited access. Have you ever looked at the dossier they have on you?

Advertisers pay to show their advertisements. That’s who pays for it. Simple. It has nothing todo with journalists or news media corporations. In your interpretation of news the people are the news. As I said Facebook does not need the news media corporations. The 2.2b users are there because they generate the content that others want to see which allows advertising.

I think you are off track in terms of this thread and the news media deals associated with new laws. News in this instance is news generated by news media corporations or news businesses.

You’re talking about news which is generated by professional journalists etc. Why would that be of benefit to a social platform?
It’s enhanced content and professionally written. Sure some of it is gossip and opinion but it is professionally presented by those who have access and the skill to investigate.
If you asked yourself honestly why you are a member of fb, Twitter or even this forum the answer would be the same. You come on hear for news and sharing of ideas/opinions. But it’s the news which is the big bait. When an insider like the Pom delivers the news you are more accepting as opposed to say, me giving you my opinion?
Mike, if you think fb was created purely for members to enjoy chatting then you’re being naive. I agree with you, that the members are doing some heavy lifting by creating much of the news stories, but the main game is reaching out to a very large number of qualified prospects to sell something. An idea, a new potato peeler, a political point of view, whatever you want to sell. That’s where fb makes more than 90% of its revenue and that’s why it is it’s core business.

I’m not entirely disagreeing with you. However news content from news media corporations is not needed by Facebook. That’s not what Facebook is about. It really adds very little value when it can be obtained from other sources. Despite your assurances most of it is crap anyway and not very professional. I always try and go to the source and that isn’t a journalist. Have you every had a paper publish something about you, your company or a family member. If you have you will know just how distorted the news media is. It’s whatever spin they can put on it that is more likely to attract readers and hence advertisers. It mostly has very little todo with facts. There are of course exceptions but that’s what they are exceptions, they are rare.

I’ve exactly asked myself why I am on Facebook and it had absolutely nothing todo with news content generated by news media corporations. I am there to keep in contact with my relatives and friends who live in different states and on various different continents on this planet. I am also there to discuss and learn about things that interest me. I am able to discuss and chat with like minded individuals and experts in a particular field that I would otherwise never have a chance to meet.

All of my ‘friends’ are there for similar reasons.

Facebook generates revenue from my interactions by showing me advertising. It’s really not that hard to understand.

I'm on Facebook to share memes and rant about sport, I barely have any family on it...

 

[mike]

IMHO Facebooks core business is collecting consumers and profiling them with the view of selling access to a qualified group of consumers depending on what it is you’re selling. It acts as intermediary , while guarding its valuable consumers from open access by its customers, the sellers. Facebook has amassed its 2.2b consumers through providing news in its various forms. It needs news for consumer recruitment and retention but it is not its core business.

Umm, Facebook hasn’t amassed 2.2b people by providing news. That’s a fallacy. Facebook doesn’t need news at all. Facebook has amassed 2.2b people by providing a platform were the people (users) are the content. It enables people to interact with each other and to share their lives, interests, stories and views with each other. News is something the news media corporations put on Facebook voluntarily to reach a greater audience.


The true meaning of news is different from your interpretation. It is basically information that is new. It may be in the form of gossip, a weather report, informative interaction with its consumers, a murder in your suburb and as you say sharing of each other’s lives. Regardless of what form it takes, people have a thirst for information that they don’t already have, it’s called news. And this is why people find FB useful. If it’s core business was developing a platform, then it’s been done. If it’s core business was maintaining a platform then who pays them to maintain it? No sir, it’s core business is and always has been putting people in groups and charging for limited access. Have you ever looked at the dossier they have on you?

Advertisers pay to show their advertisements. That’s who pays for it. Simple. It has nothing todo with journalists or news media corporations. In your interpretation of news the people are the news. As I said Facebook does not need the news media corporations. The 2.2b users are there because they generate the content that others want to see which allows advertising.

I think you are off track in terms of this thread and the news media deals associated with new laws. News in this instance is news generated by news media corporations or news businesses.

You’re talking about news which is generated by professional journalists etc. Why would that be of benefit to a social platform?
It’s enhanced content and professionally written. Sure some of it is gossip and opinion but it is professionally presented by those who have access and the skill to investigate.
If you asked yourself honestly why you are a member of fb, Twitter or even this forum the answer would be the same. You come on hear for news and sharing of ideas/opinions. But it’s the news which is the big bait. When an insider like the Pom delivers the news you are more accepting as opposed to say, me giving you my opinion?
Mike, if you think fb was created purely for members to enjoy chatting then you’re being naive. I agree with you, that the members are doing some heavy lifting by creating much of the news stories, but the main game is reaching out to a very large number of qualified prospects to sell something. An idea, a new potato peeler, a political point of view, whatever you want to sell. That’s where fb makes more than 90% of its revenue and that’s why it is it’s core business.

I’m not entirely disagreeing with you. However news content from news media corporations is not needed by Facebook. That’s not what Facebook is about. It really adds very little value when it can be obtained from other sources. Despite your assurances most of it is crap anyway and not very professional. I always try and go to the source and that isn’t a journalist. Have you every had a paper publish something about you, your company or a family member. If you have you will know just how distorted the news media is. It’s whatever spin they can put on it that is more likely to attract readers and hence advertisers. It mostly has very little todo with facts. There are of course exceptions but that’s what they are exceptions, they are rare.

I’ve exactly asked myself why I am on Facebook and it had absolutely nothing todo with news content generated by news media corporations. I am there to keep in contact with my relatives and friends who live in different states and on various different continents on this planet. I am also there to discuss and learn about things that interest me. I am able to discuss and chat with like minded individuals and experts in a particular field that I would otherwise never have a chance to meet.

All of my ‘friends’ are there for similar reasons.

Facebook generates revenue from my interactions by showing me advertising. It’s really not that hard to understand.

I'm on Facebook to share memes and rant about sport, I barely have any family on it...

It takes all types... lol. I must say though not following any media outlets makes Facebook a very pleasant place to be.

 

[gallagher]

IMHO Facebooks core business is collecting consumers and profiling them with the view of selling access to a qualified group of consumers depending on what it is you’re selling. It acts as intermediary , while guarding its valuable consumers from open access by its customers, the sellers. Facebook has amassed its 2.2b consumers through providing news in its various forms. It needs news for consumer recruitment and retention but it is not its core business.

Umm, Facebook hasn’t amassed 2.2b people by providing news. That’s a fallacy. Facebook doesn’t need news at all. Facebook has amassed 2.2b people by providing a platform were the people (users) are the content. It enables people to interact with each other and to share their lives, interests, stories and views with each other. News is something the news media corporations put on Facebook voluntarily to reach a greater audience.


The true meaning of news is different from your interpretation. It is basically information that is new. It may be in the form of gossip, a weather report, informative interaction with its consumers, a murder in your suburb and as you say sharing of each other’s lives. Regardless of what form it takes, people have a thirst for information that they don’t already have, it’s called news. And this is why people find FB useful. If it’s core business was developing a platform, then it’s been done. If it’s core business was maintaining a platform then who pays them to maintain it? No sir, it’s core business is and always has been putting people in groups and charging for limited access. Have you ever looked at the dossier they have on you?

Advertisers pay to show their advertisements. That’s who pays for it. Simple. It has nothing todo with journalists or news media corporations. In your interpretation of news the people are the news. As I said Facebook does not need the news media corporations. The 2.2b users are there because they generate the content that others want to see which allows advertising.

I think you are off track in terms of this thread and the news media deals associated with new laws. News in this instance is news generated by news media corporations or news businesses.

You’re talking about news which is generated by professional journalists etc. Why would that be of benefit to a social platform?
It’s enhanced content and professionally written. Sure some of it is gossip and opinion but it is professionally presented by those who have access and the skill to investigate.
If you asked yourself honestly why you are a member of fb, Twitter or even this forum the answer would be the same. You come on hear for news and sharing of ideas/opinions. But it’s the news which is the big bait. When an insider like the Pom delivers the news you are more accepting as opposed to say, me giving you my opinion?
Mike, if you think fb was created purely for members to enjoy chatting then you’re being naive. I agree with you, that the members are doing some heavy lifting by creating much of the news stories, but the main game is reaching out to a very large number of qualified prospects to sell something. An idea, a new potato peeler, a political point of view, whatever you want to sell. That’s where fb makes more than 90% of its revenue and that’s why it is it’s core business.

I’m not entirely disagreeing with you. However news content from news media corporations is not needed by Facebook. That’s not what Facebook is about. It really adds very little value when it can be obtained from other sources. Despite your assurances most of it is crap anyway and not very professional. I always try and go to the source and that isn’t a journalist. Have you every had a paper publish something about you, your company or a family member. If you have you will know just how distorted the news media is. It’s whatever spin they can put on it that is more likely to attract readers and hence advertisers. It mostly has very little todo with facts. There are of course exceptions but that’s what they are exceptions, they are rare.

I’ve exactly asked myself why I am on Facebook and it had absolutely nothing todo with news content generated by news media corporations. I am there to keep in contact with my relatives and friends who live in different states and on various different continents on this planet. I am also there to discuss and learn about things that interest me. I am able to discuss and chat with like minded individuals and experts in a particular field that I would otherwise never have a chance to meet.

All of my ‘friends’ are there for similar reasons.

Facebook generates revenue from my interactions by showing me advertising. It’s really not that hard to understand.

I'm on Facebook to share memes and rant about sport, I barely have any family on it...

It takes all types... lol. I must say though not following any media outlets makes Facebook a very pleasant place to be.

When a lot of the media pages started popping again after the ban was lifted I just went and blocked them. There s so much less crap there now.

 

[mike]

IMHO Facebooks core business is collecting consumers and profiling them with the view of selling access to a qualified group of consumers depending on what it is you’re selling. It acts as intermediary , while guarding its valuable consumers from open access by its customers, the sellers. Facebook has amassed its 2.2b consumers through providing news in its various forms. It needs news for consumer recruitment and retention but it is not its core business.

Umm, Facebook hasn’t amassed 2.2b people by providing news. That’s a fallacy. Facebook doesn’t need news at all. Facebook has amassed 2.2b people by providing a platform were the people (users) are the content. It enables people to interact with each other and to share their lives, interests, stories and views with each other. News is something the news media corporations put on Facebook voluntarily to reach a greater audience.


The true meaning of news is different from your interpretation. It is basically information that is new. It may be in the form of gossip, a weather report, informative interaction with its consumers, a murder in your suburb and as you say sharing of each other’s lives. Regardless of what form it takes, people have a thirst for information that they don’t already have, it’s called news. And this is why people find FB useful. If it’s core business was developing a platform, then it’s been done. If it’s core business was maintaining a platform then who pays them to maintain it? No sir, it’s core business is and always has been putting people in groups and charging for limited access. Have you ever looked at the dossier they have on you?

Advertisers pay to show their advertisements. That’s who pays for it. Simple. It has nothing todo with journalists or news media corporations. In your interpretation of news the people are the news. As I said Facebook does not need the news media corporations. The 2.2b users are there because they generate the content that others want to see which allows advertising.

I think you are off track in terms of this thread and the news media deals associated with new laws. News in this instance is news generated by news media corporations or news businesses.

You’re talking about news which is generated by professional journalists etc. Why would that be of benefit to a social platform?
It’s enhanced content and professionally written. Sure some of it is gossip and opinion but it is professionally presented by those who have access and the skill to investigate.
If you asked yourself honestly why you are a member of fb, Twitter or even this forum the answer would be the same. You come on hear for news and sharing of ideas/opinions. But it’s the news which is the big bait. When an insider like the Pom delivers the news you are more accepting as opposed to say, me giving you my opinion?
Mike, if you think fb was created purely for members to enjoy chatting then you’re being naive. I agree with you, that the members are doing some heavy lifting by creating much of the news stories, but the main game is reaching out to a very large number of qualified prospects to sell something. An idea, a new potato peeler, a political point of view, whatever you want to sell. That’s where fb makes more than 90% of its revenue and that’s why it is it’s core business.

I’m not entirely disagreeing with you. However news content from news media corporations is not needed by Facebook. That’s not what Facebook is about. It really adds very little value when it can be obtained from other sources. Despite your assurances most of it is crap anyway and not very professional. I always try and go to the source and that isn’t a journalist. Have you every had a paper publish something about you, your company or a family member. If you have you will know just how distorted the news media is. It’s whatever spin they can put on it that is more likely to attract readers and hence advertisers. It mostly has very little todo with facts. There are of course exceptions but that’s what they are exceptions, they are rare.

I’ve exactly asked myself why I am on Facebook and it had absolutely nothing todo with news content generated by news media corporations. I am there to keep in contact with my relatives and friends who live in different states and on various different continents on this planet. I am also there to discuss and learn about things that interest me. I am able to discuss and chat with like minded individuals and experts in a particular field that I would otherwise never have a chance to meet.

All of my ‘friends’ are there for similar reasons.

Facebook generates revenue from my interactions by showing me advertising. It’s really not that hard to understand.

I'm on Facebook to share memes and rant about sport, I barely have any family on it...

It takes all types... lol. I must say though not following any media outlets makes Facebook a very pleasant place to be.

When a lot of the media pages started popping again after the ban was lifted I just went and blocked them. There s so much less crap there now.

Same here