Tried to post a video of a guy building an ATV and Canadian government won't allow it

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, ExFlyer said:

1. Yes, business is business. Feds tax...you want to give them more money??

2. No, this tax on social media is not even close to cheese and cars.

3. Social media is you...not the manufacturer or producer and not protecting Canadian producers and manufacturers.

1. The money goes to Canadian media companies 

2. Seems you didn't understand the protection measures for the Canadian media companies when you wrote this. 

3. I would agree if you were writing the content, such as a post. But you're sharing a file.. just like sharing a movie or a piece of music.

 

[ExFlyer]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

1. The money goes to Canadian media companies 

2. Seems you didn't understand the protection measures for the Canadian media companies when you wrote this. 

3. I would agree if you were writing the content, such as a post. But you're sharing a file.. just like sharing a movie or a piece of music.

 

1. some of it.

2. I do understand and see the "protection measures" but I am also in favour of if you do a good job",you will stay in business.

3. Well, file sharing is the issue....with the government isn't it. They wan tto tax social media for  sharing files so, social media says no.

 

Going back to #2. I am fortunate enough to have travelled and travel a lot in North America and Europe.

We here in Canada have allowed our media to be monopolized by a few companies so when you say the media gets the money, only what, 3 or 4 companies get subsidized? In my town, we have 2 newspapers, btoh owned by the same company. The headlines are different but the story content is identical. 2 TV networks CBC and CTV and the radio is owned by CTV.  My evening news is 15 minutes local and the rest belched out of Toronto. I watch the first 15 minutes then the local weather (which has had the same low tech weather map for 15 years) then watch reruns of Star Trek LOL Same goes for my local newspapers.

The media, TV, radio and print in the US, even small towns is doing fine as it is in Europe. How come in Canada it cannot survive? I suggest to  you that the product is so inferior and not worth watching. The media is dying why? Because social media has been the provider of information to the public. Why? because the media sucks and we insist on subsidizing it. no reason for it to get better because we tax anything that may be better.

So, I am on the side of facebook. for not paying to subsidize media that they do not even deal with.

 

[Michael Hardner]

19 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. some of it.

 

19 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

2. We here in Canada have allowed our media to be monopolized by a few companies so when you say the media gets the money, only what, 3 or 4 companies get subsidized?  

3. The media, TV, radio and print in the US, even small towns is doing fine as it is in Europe. How come in Canada it cannot survive?

1. This link seems to account for all of it?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/google-canadian-news-companies-1.7228190&ved=2ahUKEwibs82By4uHAxVgrYkEHXYTD2wQFnoECA0QBQ&usg=AOvVaw243c8vFVQVZGzxu9g_WUNn

2. Again, see the link.

3. We're seeing similar declines and consolidation to monopoly in the US.  Not sure about Europe.

I'm fine with letting media die, as a concept.  But we put strong government control on many industries.  Mulroney was so concerned about culture that he wrote a media exemption into the FTA.

[ExFlyer]

16 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

 

1. This link seems to account for all of it?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/google-canadian-news-companies-1.7228190&ved=2ahUKEwibs82By4uHAxVgrYkEHXYTD2wQFnoECA0QBQ&usg=AOvVaw243c8vFVQVZGzxu9g_WUNn

2. Again, see the link.

3. We're seeing similar declines and consolidation to monopoly in the US.  Not sure about Europe.

I'm fine with letting media die, as a concept.  But we put strong government control on many industries.  Mulroney was so concerned about culture that he wrote a media exemption into the FTA.

I see Google kowtowing to government wishes. They did not have to and I wished they did not. The link only describes what Google is doing. I think they are wrong.

All that happens now is the media can get more complacent with poor product because  Google is going to give them money on top of what the government already gives them.

I disagree with the US seeing media decline. Geez, small towns that I visit have better local news than I do in the nations capital LOL

Take a city like Buffalo 5+ newspapers (some weekly) not including the national papers like WSJ, USA Today etc.   4 networks with lots of local news (CBS has 2 hours in the morning and 2 hours in the evening) and it is not even 1/2 the size of Ottawa, the nations capital.

My point is that social media, facebook, twitter (X), all forums , reddit, Quora etc are a platform and controlled basically by the users and yet our government insists the platforms pay for what the users do or say.

Why is X not paying??? Even the news media advertise and have accounts in X, not even notong that every reporter has an X account?

Edited July 3, 2024 by ExFlyer

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. I see Google kowtowing to government wishes. They did not have to and I wished they did not. The link only describes what Google is doing. I think they are wrong.

All that happens now is the media can get more complacent with poor product because  Google is going to give them money on top of what the government already gives them.

2. I disagree with the US seeing media decline. Geez, small towns that I visit have better local news than I do in the nations capital LOL

Take a city like Buffalo 5+ newspapers (some weekly) not including the national papers like WSJ, USA Today etc.   4 networks with lots of local news (CBS has 2 hours in the morning and 2 hours in the evening) and it is not even 1/2 the size of Ottawa, the nations capital.

3. My point is that social media, facebook, twitter (X), all forums , reddit, Quora etc are a platform and controlled basically by the users and yet our government insists the platforms pay for what the users do or say.

Why is X not paying??? Even the news media advertise and have accounts in X, not even notong that every reporter has an X account?

1. Ok, but I posted it to respond to your concerns about the government taking a cut of the Google $100M

2. Network news, cable news and TV has indeed declined but that's for another thread 

3. No, the algorithms decide what you see.

[ExFlyer]

26 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ok, but I posted it to respond to your concerns about the government taking a cut of the Google $100M

2. Network news, cable news and TV has indeed declined but that's for another thread 

3. No, the algorithms decide what you see.

1. No matter what you call it, it is government imposed payment on Google. As i recall, Google was the only one that succumbed.

2. Certainly can be but, it fits into the OP's complaint.

3. I disagree completely. No discriminating algorithms for social media. X is censored??? Truth Social is vetted?? I think not LOL Especially forums...as this forum is a perfect example of unfettered posting.. There are "rules", some of which may be enforced if posters complain and if admins want to do anything. Facebook does have "rules".

[Michael Hardner]

32 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. No matter what you call it, it is government imposed payment on Google. As i recall, Google was the only one that succumbed.

2. Certainly can be but, it fits into the OP's complaint.

3. I disagree completely. No discriminating algorithms for social media. X is censored??? Truth Social is vetted?? I think not LOL Especially forums...as this forum is a perfect example of unfettered posting.. There are "rules", some of which may be enforced if posters complain and if admins want to do anything. Facebook does have "rules".

 

33 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

 No discriminating algorithms for social media. X is censored???  

Yes, X is censored by the platform.

[ExFlyer]

41 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

 

Yes, X is censored by the platform.

"It's important to know that X does not screen content or remove potentially offensive content. As a policy, we do not mediate content or intervene in disputes between users. However, targeted abuse or harassment may constitute a violation of the X Rules and Terms of Service."

https://help.x.com/en/safety-and-security/offensive-posts-and-content

 

Michael, as you can tell, I am very passionate about this subject. That the government coerced/forced/taxed/ordered social media to pay for our Canadian monopolistic media. That someone else has to subsidize our poor media product and performance. That our government allowed our news media to become a monopoly.

Edited July 3, 2024 by ExFlyer

[Michael Hardner]

40 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

 

Michael, as you can tell, I am very passionate about this subject. That the government coerced/forced/taxed/ordered social media to pay for our Canadian monopolistic media. That someone else has to subsidize our poor media product and performance. That our government allowed our news media to become a monopoly.

You don't know about the algorithms I guess. They'll allow you to post anything you want, but if it doesn't show up anyone's news feed what does it matter?

I also understand complaining about our Canadian media. But letting Facebook, and Twitter decide what news you see is actually worse.

[blackbird]

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Google serves news and forms of social contact too.  And they pay up.

What social contact?  Can you explain?  FB never signed up because it would be impossible to manually look at every link that people post with millions of users.  That is why this kind of government control is senseless.  It is only causing harm.

[Michael Hardner]

18 minutes ago, blackbird said:

What social contact?  Can you explain?  FB never signed up because it would be impossible to manually look at every link that people post with millions of users.  That is why this kind of government control is senseless.  It is only causing harm.

Photos, meeting apps, email... Other apps,all shared with Facebook and everything else.

Your continued assertions that it's technically infeasible to track news sites needs a reference at this point.  Every link has a URL that needs to be rendered.  It would be a matter of scanning certain URLS.  In fact I think it would be easier than whatever they're doing now to block news.  They wouldn't have to try to block YouTube and everything else. 

That's right actually.. YouTube is another Google product.

[blackbird]

Canada risks “much more censored & surveilled” internet | Watch (msn.com)

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Photos, meeting apps, email...

None of that is anything near the size of Facebook.   Do you have an actual link to show Google has a social media website of any significance?

I can not find a social media platform that is specifically a Google platform?  What is it called?

Edited July 4, 2024 by blackbird

[ExFlyer]

14 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

You don't know about the algorithms I guess. They'll allow you to post anything you want, but if it doesn't show up anyone's news feed what does it matter?

I also understand complaining about our Canadian media. But letting Facebook, and Twitter decide what news you see is actually worse.

You see Michael, by your statement that facebook and twitter decides what news you see is where you are off the rails.  I linked you to X policy and facebook just will not allow links,

Facebook and twitter are user platforms and they do not b=make or show the news unless the users, you and me, post it. Facebook and twitter do not generate or distribute news, they are just the platform for what users do.

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

You see Michael, by your statement that facebook and twitter decides what news you see is where you are off the rails.  I linked you to X policy and facebook just will not allow links,

Facebook and twitter are user platforms and they do not b=make or show the news unless the users, you and me, post it. Facebook and twitter do not generate or distribute news, they are just the platform for what users do.

All I can say is that you don't understand the power of the algorithms.

[Michael Hardner]

@blackbird here's an article from the Lethbridge Herald that outlines the impact of US social media giants on Canadian media and their jobs 

https://lethbridgeherald.com/commentary/opinions/2023/08/16/meta-google-profiting-from-canadian-news-outlets/

No major democratic nation can survive without a domestic forum for discussion of policy.  This is why Mulroney almost walked away from the Free Trade Agreement of the US didn't include cultural and media exemptions.

[ExFlyer]

32 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

All I can say is that you don't understand the power of the algorithms.

Michael, I think you over estimate algorithms. If you think facebook algorithm censors posts you are wrong. "The Facebook algorithm is a set of ranking signals powered by machine learning and artificial intelligence. It calculates which content is most likely to appeal to each user and then delivers them a personalized feed."

Also you disregard the fact facebook does not allow links from Canada period.   And do not believe the X policy I posted.

There is not talk of instagram, whatapp, tiktok etc which are also social media platforms. It seems you and others are upset with facebook only LOL

Oh and Google is not social media, "Google LLC is an American multinational corporation and technology company focusing on online advertising, search engine technology, cloud computing, computer software, quantum computing, e-commerce, consumer electronics, and artificial intelligence."

Edited July 4, 2024 by ExFlyer

[ExFlyer]

21 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

@blackbird here's an article from the Lethbridge Herald that outlines the impact of US social media giants on Canadian media and their jobs 

https://lethbridgeherald.com/commentary/opinions/2023/08/16/meta-google-profiting-from-canadian-news-outlets/

No major democratic nation can survive without a domestic forum for discussion of policy.  This is why Mulroney almost walked away from the Free Trade Agreement of the US didn't include cultural and media exemptions.

The article is just whining that meta is not paying but more importantly, that it does not allow Canadian news..

That and , Google has since the article ,succumbed.... but is the only one,

Edited July 4, 2024 by ExFlyer

[Michael Hardner]

21 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. Michael, I think you over estimate algorithms.  

2. Also you disregard the fact facebook does not allow links from Canada period.   And do not believe the X policy I posted.

3. There is not talk of instagram, whatapp, tiktok etc which are also social media platforms. It seems you and others are upset with facebook only LOL

 

1. Again, I think that you don't understand.

2. I meant before Meta"s withdrawal of news.  Generally, letting US corporation prioritize mass communication in our nation is anti nationalist.

3. Facebook is the company challenging the law.  Actually, Meta, which is instagram.  The US is considering BANNING TikTok.  So clearly the US and Australia are thinking about these companies.

[ExFlyer]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Again, I think that you don't understand.

2. I meant before Meta"s withdrawal of news.  Generally, letting US corporation prioritize mass communication in our nation is anti nationalist.

3. Facebook is the company challenging the law.  Actually, Meta, which is instagram.  The US is considering BANNING TikTok.  So clearly the US and Australia are thinking about these companies.

1.Michael, it is you that does not understand.

You are not willing to believe that it ts the users that use and post and determine content on social platforms.

2. Before meta is not worth discussing because that was before the Canadian ruling.  They just choose not to succumb to a law punishing them for what you do or say. Are you somehow implying that Meta be a source for Canadian news??/ They don''t do that, they just regurgitate what you post.

I cannot understand how you can even come to the conclusion that "US corporation prioritize mass communication in our nation is anti nationalist."???  They do not do anything about tor with he news, you do, you post and link and spread it, not them. They are just the platform. It is like saying the paper producer is responsible for what you write on it LOL

3. As for the US banning TikTok, even the US realizes they cannot do that.

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

@blackbird here's an article from the Lethbridge Herald that outlines the impact of US social media giants on Canadian media and their jobs 

https://lethbridgeherald.com/commentary/opinions/2023/08/16/meta-google-profiting-from-canadian-news-outlets/

No major democratic nation can survive without a domestic forum for discussion of policy.  This is why Mulroney almost walked away from the Free Trade Agreement of the US didn't include cultural and media exemptions.

I think you are going off on a tangent.  That has nothing to do with the fact the governments regulations are destroying freedom to post thing that are not news.  They have taken a sledge hammer to kill a fly and are causing anarchy on the internet and denying freedom of expression.  They probably don't even understand themselves the effect of their regulations.  They are out of touch with reality.

[Michael Hardner]

25 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1.Michael, it is you that does not understand.

2. You are not willing to believe that it ts the users that use and post and determine content on social platforms.

 

3. I cannot understand how you can even come to the conclusion that "US corporation prioritize mass communication in our nation is anti nationalist."???  They do not do anything about tor with he news, you do, you post and link and spread it, not them. They are just the platform. It is like saying the paper producer is responsible for what you write on it LOL

4. As for the US banning TikTok, even the US realizes they cannot do that.

1. 2. Posting content is pointless if the algorithm does not share it en masse. I have never seen you post an acknowledgment of that fact. 

3. Another example, you think that individuals spread the Twitter news. In fact, Twitter decides to share it with others or not based on the algorithm. 

4. I don't know why you're saying that. They've already given a mandate for tick Tock to sell to a domestic owner.

 

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I think you are going off on a tangent.  That has nothing to do with the fact the governments regulations are destroying freedom to post thing that are not news. 

Your issue is with Facebook, not the government.

[ExFlyer]

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. 2. Posting content is pointless if the algorithm does not share it en masse. I have never seen you post an acknowledgment of that fact. 

3. Another example, you think that individuals spread the Twitter news. In fact, Twitter decides to share it with others or not based on the algorithm. 

4. I don't know why you're saying that. They've already given a mandate for tick Tock to sell to a domestic owner.

 

Your issue is with Facebook, not the government.

OK Michael.

Goodbye on this topic.

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. Posting content is pointless if the algorithm does not share it en masse.

You are obsessed with the word "algorithm" as if that can filter out the news from everything else.  No it can't.  Algorithms are simply man-made programs.  They cannot do that job as I have shown with this OP.  They filtered out a video about a guy building an ATV which is not news.  That's what algorithms do.  They are not humans.

I don't think you understand that AI or an algorithm can not separate news from other content that people post.  That is the problem in a nutshell.  To screen out news it would take actual humans to read every post and that is not feasible on Facebook because of the size of the platform and number of users.  It would not be economic to try to use people to censor every post.  There are millions of postings every day.

Edited July 4, 2024 by blackbird

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, blackbird said:

1. I don't think you understand that AI or an algorithm can not separate news from other content that people post. 

 

1. No, you're right but that's not the algorithm's job.   I explained how Facebook can use URLs to block.