this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
66 points (90.2% liked)

Canada

9605 readers
1770 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nathris 16 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It wasn't a ban. It was a tax designed to funnel money into the media companies that own our politicians.

It failed spectacularly because it shows that Canadians don't visit Facebook for news coverage, and that Meta was 100% correct to not pay for access to content that its users don't care about.

[–] m0darn 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I agree that the tax was designed to funnel money into the media oligopoly to which our politicians are beholden.

But like the headline, you are conflating the tax with the ban. They aren't two sides of the same coin, the ban (or maybe more accurately boycott) is a reaction to the tax.

[–] Dearche 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Was it a tax? I thought the law simply required third parties to actually pay for reproducing the work of news outlets? Basically paying for paid work, rather than just stealing it?

[–] m0darn 2 points 2 years ago

You're right I was duped by Google.