Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Interviews & Vacation Schemes
Commercial Awareness Discussion
Out With the Old, In With The New(s)? Not for Facebook Australia
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dheepa" data-source="post: 67566" data-attributes="member: 1572"><p>I think the issue with subscription like model is that it places even more bargaining power in the hands of the Big Tech platforms. Twitter dictates how much revenue gets shared, dictates any other terms and conditions with journalists and all the while still get to maintain that they are helping the news/journalism industry. Seems to me like it would be more a workaround rather than compliance with the legislation and considering the extent of the crack down on Big Tech, I'm not sure governments would let this one go very easily. </p><p></p><p>Completely agree that the Australian legislation fails smaller news outlets though. Not to be cynical but even with the bigger news groups, no telling how much of the additional revenue will actually go into producing more independent journalism and hiring more journalists vs just padding shareholder/executive pockets.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dheepa, post: 67566, member: 1572"] I think the issue with subscription like model is that it places even more bargaining power in the hands of the Big Tech platforms. Twitter dictates how much revenue gets shared, dictates any other terms and conditions with journalists and all the while still get to maintain that they are helping the news/journalism industry. Seems to me like it would be more a workaround rather than compliance with the legislation and considering the extent of the crack down on Big Tech, I'm not sure governments would let this one go very easily. Completely agree that the Australian legislation fails smaller news outlets though. Not to be cynical but even with the bigger news groups, no telling how much of the additional revenue will actually go into producing more independent journalism and hiring more journalists vs just padding shareholder/executive pockets. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Interviews & Vacation Schemes
Commercial Awareness Discussion
Out With the Old, In With The New(s)? Not for Facebook Australia
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…