As a Canadian, I have a hard time with this interview. The history of Google News is about scraping after they saw a spike in traffic from 9/11. That started their domination and value extraction from publishers in the guise of helping. Leading even to Bill C18 and Gingras saying Gingras said Google News sends millions of visitors to news sites and costs millions to operate but doesn't bring the company any revenue.
"If we must pay publishers for simply linking to their sites, making us lose money with every click, it would be reasonable for us or any business to reconsider why we would continue to do so," he said.
The answer is because you built your business on their content with the promise of traffic and growth.
Fact:
Kevin Carty, a researcher at the Open Markets Institute, said that Google’s enormous stature gives it a special responsibility to offer some form of transparency about how its algorithms work — especially since Google News depends on news outlets in order to exist as a useful tool.
“Google News and Google Search are interesting because they’re only possible and profitable because these other services and publications are providing things of such great value,” he said. “Google News would be nothing without CNN and the Washington Post and NPR.”
What came through for me is that Google doesn't see itself as responsible to publishers whatsoever.
It sees itself as responsible for organising the world's information. Full stop.
And why should it pay publishers for fulfilling its role?
It's like a gardener that trims roses. They don't expect to pay the roses, but they do expect to be paid by people who want to see the neatly trimmed roses.
It's a subtle but comprehensive disparity of understanding between engineers and creators.
That's the fulcrum of this and understanding and aligning a North Star from this difference of opinion feels essential to creating a sustainable partnership.
As a Canadian, I have a hard time with this interview. The history of Google News is about scraping after they saw a spike in traffic from 9/11. That started their domination and value extraction from publishers in the guise of helping. Leading even to Bill C18 and Gingras saying Gingras said Google News sends millions of visitors to news sites and costs millions to operate but doesn't bring the company any revenue.
"If we must pay publishers for simply linking to their sites, making us lose money with every click, it would be reasonable for us or any business to reconsider why we would continue to do so," he said.
The answer is because you built your business on their content with the promise of traffic and growth.
Fact:
Kevin Carty, a researcher at the Open Markets Institute, said that Google’s enormous stature gives it a special responsibility to offer some form of transparency about how its algorithms work — especially since Google News depends on news outlets in order to exist as a useful tool.
“Google News and Google Search are interesting because they’re only possible and profitable because these other services and publications are providing things of such great value,” he said. “Google News would be nothing without CNN and the Washington Post and NPR.”
What came through for me is that Google doesn't see itself as responsible to publishers whatsoever.
It sees itself as responsible for organising the world's information. Full stop.
And why should it pay publishers for fulfilling its role?
It's like a gardener that trims roses. They don't expect to pay the roses, but they do expect to be paid by people who want to see the neatly trimmed roses.
It's a subtle but comprehensive disparity of understanding between engineers and creators.
That's the fulcrum of this and understanding and aligning a North Star from this difference of opinion feels essential to creating a sustainable partnership.