- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Honestly, I don’t know what the lawmakers expected. The bill is dumb. It’d be perfectly fine to require payment for copying a substantial amount of a new article (eg, if they want to prevent google from offering a public cache that gets around paywalls). But the bill outright requires paying to link to Canadian news sites in search results. That’s outright madness.
Y’all can hate google and meta all you want. That’s totally fine. I encourage you to use competing search engines (it’s bad that Google has a near monopoly). But this bill is a bad bill.
The folks on this site might know about alternatives, but the average person doesn’t. When the average person can’t find Canadian news sites on Google, they’re not going to switch to duck duck go or whatever. They’re going to just use a non Canadian site. This bill is going to hurt Canadian news companies and it’s disappointing to see people cheering it on because you’re happier to see Google and meta hurt than you are sorry to see Canadian news sites hurt…
yeah the scraping content is the issue, not the linking. So this bill is pretty stupidly formed. They can simple require google/meta only provide line, title and max 250 letters abstract/trimmed first paragraph(excluding space and punctuation.)
They(Canadian medias) want the traffic to their site so they can display sponsor ads or sell subscriptions.
It’s the control over the advertising that’s the issue. Scraping content is fine, as long as it’s following copyright laws.
The issue is that the Toronto Star used to make most of their money by being able to offer prime advertising space next to its articles. The rest of their money was from subscriptions and newspaper sales, which people were willing to pay because it was the only way to get the news in a portable form.
More money for newspaper ads meant more money available to journalists, which made the advertising space next to those columns more valuable. It was a virtuous cycle where the better your journalists were, the more valuable the ad space next to them became. Nowadays, Meta and Google control that ad space and take a massive cut of any ad shown there.
At the same time, someone doesn’t need to own a printing press to make an article available, thanks to the Internet. That means that mediocre quality “citizen journalism” and low-quality press releases compete for ad space in a way they didn’t in the heyday of print journalism. The idea of “buying a newspaper” is gone and will probably never come back because mobile internet meant that getting access to news (and other content) was just so easy.
Meta and Google get virtually all their money from ads. The way to reduce their impact on Canadian journalism isn’t to force them to pay some kind of “link tax”, it’s to address their ads monopoly and give back control over ads to the publishers.
I am not sure if I am missing something here, if directing the viewer to website and website display the content+ad, how does google take a cut? Google take a cut from sponsored link right? So if the media feel that paying for the link redirection is an extortion, then don’t buy sponsored links right?
I am old enough that I know what news is like before internet, so to compete the eyeballs and attract regular/repeat users, your content needs to be in top quality. And we all know how it’s not the “media” controlling ads, it’s the other way around, it’s who paid for ad space controlling the media. And to be honest, it was never a good healthy cycle anyway.(see TV ads, new paper ads, youtube ads, and intrusive web ads), faster and shorter engagement time means less conversion, and usually it means worse content overtime as sites try everything to prolong engagement time. (ie. sponsored content, embeded autoplay, more “next page”, more “releated” “you might also be interested” links with clickbait title/thumbnail, etc, etc.)
People ARE statistics, there are portion of people that are considering buying certain thing, so owning your social interation/search data leads to higher associations, thus more effective ads. It’s the sole reason why Google/Meta’s business work, cause they can do user targeted ads.
Let’s be honest, journalist quality is going down the drain as well. Like almost 30~40% of content is lagging social network for about minimum half day up toward a week. Maybe articles are just glorified blog post of referencing social media posts. Don’t get me wrong, people do crave quality content articles, it’s just that majority of time, even when posted to say special interest sub-reddit, the content itself is really lacking. ie. say, compare the hardware review from early 2000 and now(after 2020), it takes “longer” to get to the point, it was filled with many charts that aren’t really interesting(cause we know benchmark and game performance are usually have special driver treatment etc.), less article explains the important architecture changes, how much it would affect your experience(just copy paste sponsor marketing material), talking about the hard points like is it worth the upgrade, longevity, etc. It’s so bad that usually, asking in a specific gaming sub or discord about certain hardware gives you less biased feedbacks and chances are, they also give you links to cheaper vendor or links to price tracker. Hardware review sites gives you none of that(here is our sponsored market place, please support us by using the linkes below, blah.)
Last but not least, the intrusive full screen blocking shit when I just view the article’s first paragraph and scroll 2 mouse wheel ticks down. How can a website expect me to subscribe without at least let me check 1 article? heck, like even 1 page or something before you pop that thing and ask me to subscribe. I am trained in a way that if I clicked an external link and see that full screen block, I just ctrl+w and close that tab. It is not worth my time. And I am the type of guy that whitelist sites that are actually helpful or pay visit often. The media sites aren’t doing their best to keep or invite random visitors to come again. It’s pretty much the same shit if you just scroll through Edge’s suggested contents.( which I have to turn off everytime if the update reset my settings. ) They have to provide something where people are willing to stick around.
if directing the viewer to website and website display the content+ad, how does google take a cut?
Nearly every ad on the Internet that isn’t on Facebook is a Google ad. They take approximately 1/3 of the money the publisher makes on the ad. So, if Ford pays $1 per click on an ad shown on the Toronto Star, the Star gets $0.68 and Google gets $0.32. Also, Ford pays Google to show that ad because Google runs both the publisher and advertiser sides of the game.
And we all know how it’s not the “media” controlling ads, it’s the other way around
Sure, to some extent. But, the big, powerful news organizations used to have content that was in such high demand that they journalism staff was insulated from the ads side of things. It also used to be a point of honour among journalists and their editors that they were going to speak truth to power, even if it alienated some of their advertisers.
usually, asking in a specific gaming sub or discord about certain hardware gives you less biased feedbacks
I disagree, most communities become echo-chambers, certain hardware is popular, and certain hardware is “trash” and if you disagree you get downvoted or shouted down. It’s very rare when you can have an informed, balanced conversation about whether nVidia or AMD have the best card at a certain price point. At best you have fanbois for each side duking it out.
Anyhow, the point is that traditional media, media that actually hires people who went to journalism school, now has to compete with random bloggers, people who want to be influencers, people looking to be paid for their affiliate links, etc. Google and Facebook don’t care what you click on, as long as there’s a chance you’ll click on their ads. So, if they have to pay a link tax to link to traditional media companies, they’re happy just to link to the other stuff instead – or just to link to American news sites.
So, if Ford pays $1 per click on an ad shown on the Toronto Star
That’s the root cause no? why does it has to go through Google or Meta? If Ford paid google and Toronto Star give google ad space for ad revenue split, everything is in the contract. There is no law to prevent traditional media to have their own union ad organization right? Or at very least, Toronto can refuse and run their own ad space selling like old paper times. If say, Ford can’t do it the old way like on paper, why is that? Toronto Star don’t have enough technical people to handle online ad? don’t know how to do ad pricing and conversion tracking? don’t know how to do targeted ads? Those aren’t google’s fault, if traditional media wants to save money on upgrade their ad technology and backend, they will ended up forking money and purchase what others provided.
used to have content that was in such high demand
That’s also not google’s problem, it’s the industry’s problem. Like theaters/cable tv fighting for survival against streaming, brick and mortar fighting against Amazon, people only want to spend time or money on things they feel justified.
most communities become echo-chambers
If you go to nvidia community and ask what AMD card is better, then yeah, that’s sort of stupid. In my example, my question or intention is to ask directly in the game’s community. ie. if you ask which monitor might be best in “Home Theater” vs in “CS:GO” community, you would get totally different answer. Which is exactly what should happen for specific “review” for certain target audience. But we only get generic reviews that covers some talk points but not have actual feedbacks. So if I want to have best performance for say, Street Fighter, than I go ask in that community for best setup. Compare to spend hours and hours on review sites, you can quickly get a couple candidates for building/upgrading your PC/setup.
Lastly, say, if people go through say, fine art school, should we protect their job opportunity? Or people that have management degree they should get management jobs? Where are those shoe fixing/tailor made clothing jobs? The entire world is moving target, “used to be” is not a proper excuse to put a bad legislation that might actually back fire and damage the industry in the end.
why does it has to go through Google or Meta?
They have a duopoly.
There is no law to prevent traditional media to have their own union ad organization right?
No law, no. But, you understand how monopolies / duopolies / cartels work, right?
Toronto can refuse and run their own ad space selling like old paper times
No, the old times are gone.
Toronto Star don’t have enough technical people to handle online ad?
It’s not technical people, although they don’t have them either. It’s that they don’t have the reach / coverage / power of the duopoly and can’t realistically compete with them.
don’t know how to do ad pricing and conversion tracking?
Again, a red herring.
Those aren’t google’s fault, if traditional media wants to save money on upgrade their ad technology and backend, they will ended up forking money and purchase what others provided.
That’s like saying that if you don’t like Bell Canada’s phone prices, just start your own continent-spanning telephony company.
my question or intention is to ask directly in the game’s community
Which is likely to be polarized for either AMD or nVidia.
Lastly, say, if people go through say, fine art school, should we protect their job opportunity?
Irrelevant to what we’re discussing.
No law, no. But, you understand how monopolies / duopolies / cartels work, right?
Yes, and it’s why the people needs to fucking get on the topic of breaking up companies that are too big and concentrated(both political and economical influence). And we just keep approving mergers left and right and complaint why government didn’t have laws(we did) to protect us(small~medium sized companies).
Compare to groceries that involves huge supply chain network, selling ads are actually quite diverse and lively.(that’s why we have ad blockers remember?) And Toronto Star can use the legislation to block linking, contract out their ad space to who had the highest bid. I donno? Maybe some cam-girl site would want a block on Toronto Star right? If you have a product that are very cost efficient, not subject to abuse compare to what google offers, I bet they would like to try as well.
It’s that they don’t have the reach / coverage / power of the duopoly and can’t realistically compete with them.
What did they do when google purchase adsense and other coming up companies? Who says Toronto Star needs to compete with google on selling ads? They just need enough investment or contract it out to cover their operation cost + some revenue right? You said old time is gone why? because Toronto Star by just selling the ad space directly toward ad clients(like Ford you mentioned) is already not financially feasible? So it is cheaper and more beneficial to just use google or meta or whatever established services? It sounds like common sense to hire good contractor to do specialized jobs right? And if everyone can only buy service from a monopoly, or whatever equivalent terms for small amount of competitors, that’s what anti-trust legislation is for.
It just happens that who ever push this “oh this sounds a smart plan” are both business and public policy idiots. The legislation directly shoots the medias they want to protect at their bottom line, it’s like threatening your plumber to give you a discount otherwise you are gonna bust your own pipe again and sue them for it.
That’s like saying that if you don’t like Bell Canada’s phone prices, just start your own continent-spanning telephony company.
Yes you literally can(if you qualify from current legislation), and that’s why it’s fucking stupid to give public funded infrastructure to a privatized company(and what protests we had when that happened?). If you don’t like how it is currently now, do more things in politics. oh wait, no one wants to do that get hands dirty job. Remember the old time where TV and press higher ups are buddies with politicians? Who knew they can be more buddies to the social network companies or tech giants?
Which is likely to be polarized for either AMD or nVidia.
Who said it’s only GPUs?
Irrelevant to what we’re discussing.
Then why did you bring up their qualification, go to school, honor, blah blah into discussion? A good reporter/journalist reports condensed, easy to under stand facts for things that happened and what might be of effect to their readers. When the traditional media still focus on engagement rate time, social media and influencers find ways to attract majority of people with their short attention spans. They are more effective in deliver message in shorter text/video format, EVEN if they might not be correct on the topic. The “old time” guys are competing with that efficiency, and there are no enough protection that you can implement to stop that.
edit: typos and some sentence brain farts.
I believe the meta data of the links are scrapped from the meta tags in the header of the site. The info you see before clicking a link was configured by the host for that purpose.
Exactly. I’m not sure what lawmakers were expecting. Don’t Canadian news sites make money off of ads and traffic to their site? Why would they require special treatment and compensation for merely linking to their news sites and articles?
deleted by creator
Google’s threatening to “go on strike” to ratchet up the pressure.
And it will work. It doesn’t hurt them much, but it’s devastating to the media companies because most of their traffic comes from Meta and Google.
If Jane Doe searches for “wildfires” and would have seen a story by the Toronto Star in her search results, she might have clicked it. If Google stops linking to the Star and instead now just links to a YouTube video of the wildfires, or a blog from someone nearby, Jane might click there instead. Since Google gets ad money from those sources too, it has zero effect on their bottom line, but destroys the traffic to the Star.
It’s why this “link tax” scheme failed in Germany, it failed in Australia, it’s failed everywhere that it’s been tried, since it’s a stupid idea.
Might I suggest accessing daily newspapers and magazines electronically with PressReader? You can do so for free (or tax dollars you are already paying lol) using your local public library card, if they are subscribed to this service.
With your library card:
Visit PressReader.com and click “Sign in”. A pop-up labelled “Welcome to PressReader” will appear.
Click the blue “Library or Group” button on the lower left side of the pop-up. A longer pop-up labelled “Select Library” will appear.
Click “Search Libraries and Groups” and type in your city or local public library’s name. A list of matching results will automatically appear as you type.
Click your library in the list of results. A new pop-up labelled “Library or Group Sign In” will appear.
If there are text fields for your Library card number and PIN, fill those in and click on the checkbox next to “I agree to allowing PressReader to verify and exchange my registration with my public library.” Then click the green “Log In” button at the bottom.
If the new pop-up simply has a green “Sign in” button underneath your library’s name, click it to be redirected to your local library’s website to log in.
Unfortunately, not every public library can afford to subscribe to this service. Also, some libraries do not show up on the PressReader.com “Search Libraries and Groups” list even if they do have access available via their own website. If these instructions do not work, please visit your local public library website or branch for additional information or assistance.
Thank you for providing this information.
And thank you for thanking them.
Can PressReader give me daily notifications on my phone with news articles that are relevant to me?
Great question!
The services I can think of that allow full-access aren’t quite as easy to use as Google News at this time, but here is what I have come up with:
PressReader has a “For You” page that can show you top stories based on reader engagement from any of their publications. You can also create a PressReader account free-of-charge to follow specific publications, sections, journalists and interests.
Another service I would recommend to receive notifications is Canadian Newsstream by ProQuest. This service is a regularly-updated database of news stories from most major newspapers in Canada.
Note that licensing agreements restrict some publications’ stories from being uploaded to Newsstream for one or two days, so I would recommend using this in addition to PressReader, which is more current.
You can use Newsstream to search for stories using highly-specific search queries, and request to be sent scheduled email or RSS alerts for any new query results once they are uploaded into the database.
PressReader “For You” Page
Once you have logged in to PressReader.com using your library card:
In the top left corner of PressReader, click “For You”. The page will change. (Note that it may take a few minutes to load if the service is very busy.)
On the left side, there will be a menu with the following:
- “Language & Region”, where you can select a country and language you would like to see top stories with;
- “For You”, with top stories about different topics based on the Language & Region you chose;
- “Following”, where you can see stories from your selected publications, newspaper sections, interests and journalists; and
- “Saved Searches”, where you can save keyword searches to see if there are any new updates.
Note that 3. “Following” and 4. “Saved Searches” require a free PressReader account in addition to your public library access authorization. You can register for one by clicking the green “Sign up” button on the top right corner of the page after you have signed in through your public library.
ProQuest Canadian Newsstream
Your best bet to access this service is through your local public library’s website. If they have it, you will most likely find a link to log into it in the “news” or “newspaper” section of the site’s “digital collections”, “digital library”, or “bibliothèque numérique” page.
Once logged in, you will be at Canadian Newsstream’s “Basic Search” page. You can begin keyword searching in the text field, or click “Advanced Search” underneath the main “Canadian Newsstream” header for more options.
Visit the ProQuest LibGuides for more information and instructions on creating library database search queries.
Once you have run your search, you will be at the results page. Here, you can edit your search query and change the filter settings on the left-side menu. Consider this a preview of the kind of stories you can choose to receive email notifications for.
When you are happy with the kind of results you see, click “Save search/alert” on the top right of the page just underneath the search bar. A drop-down menu will appear.
In the drop-down menu, click “Create alert” for email notifications, or “Create RSS feed” for a personalized feed you can add to your RSS reader. A pop-up will appear.
Follow the instructions in the pop-up, and you will be notified of new articles that match your search via email or RSS.
I would suggest keeping a different alert for each topic you want to follow. This will make it easier to cancel or adjust just one topic as you need to.
You can also create a free ProQuest My Research account so you can view and manage all your alerts all at once.
These steps are quite a bit more involved than simple Googling, but you get complete control over what you are searching for. The fact that you get to decide these small granular search parameters means that there are no secret algorithms deciding for you.
Thank you again for your attention. If you have any questions about using these services, I would encourage you to contact your local public library, where the staff will be able to assist you better.
Can you please write a Lemmy bot that scrapes from PressReader and publishes links here?
The world wide web was meant to be more than a few tech bros with their tentacles on everything pulling it all towards a central point that is themselves. They’re fighting for their monopoly here more than anything else. It’s time for them to quit stifling innovation so the internet can evolve again.
At the same time, the news industry has to be more than just Postmedia, BCE, Torstar and Rogers.
The issue is their domination of the online advertising space, not that they “steal” content from the news sources. Yes, they do get headlines, but then they direct people back to that media site to read the content. The real issue is that the ads on the social media post direct revenue to Meta/Google. The ads on the news media site send revenue to Meta/Google. They control the ads market on the buy side (people wanting to advertise) and the sell side (people wanting to show ads), and the exchanges between the two.
The big tech companies paying the big media companies for links is not the solution. It’s a stupid idea and has failed everywhere it has been tried. The real solution is to break up the ads monopolies.
Use DuckDuckGo #BoycottGoogle
The amount of people that don’t understand how important a news propagator like Google is is mind-blowing. Access to information is a right. This beats this right down to a pulp.
“HURR DURR GOOGLE BAD HUE HUE GOOD RIDDANCE HUE HUE I’M LE INTELLECTUAL”
Really sad. This fucked every news org. Hard. Except the big ones that own everything.
Why should Google have control over the propagation of news? Everyone can still go to the individual news organisations’ website…yes Google consolidated everything into one portal, but maybe it’s time to go back to something less centralised, which isn’t under the control of a single corporate entity, i.e. the way the web was originally intended to work.
Same reason you’re using Lemmy and don’t just go to browse every single individual website on the internet.
So then we need a non-corporate portal for news. Centralising the power of information distribution with massive companies that are driven solely by profit is not the way.
Yeah, I can’t wait to trust the feds that can’t even work out their stupid CRA website with being a source of reliable news aggregation. Just last year I SAW someone else’s tax reports on my account.
If you want to go on full /r/communism about Google, there’s a subreddit for that. But giving the finger to Canadians and internet freedom just because you hate Google is wack. City Nouvelles is not getting a dime from this bill.
Google doesn’t control the news as you tried to imply in another comment. That’s ridiculous. People that use Google made the choice to use Google for their news. Just like you chose Lemmy, some choose Meta, others choose Reddit, MSN, Yahoo, Bing, etc.
All this does is kill independent news sources and cutting choices from Canadians for the profit of the few rich corps in Canada. It’s a pure money grab.
Who said anything about the government stepping in to take over? I certainly didn’t say that. Something like Lemmy (and the Fediverse in general) isn’t government controlled, in fact it isn’t controlled by any one entity, which is one of its strengths. If you’re looking for a possible alternative to corporate or government control of media, you’re using one right now.
The problem is that Google has become a defacto default for most people. That didn’t happen just because people “decided” to start using it, the decision was made for them because Google has a great deal of money and power and can use that influence to essentially make the decision for people.
I’m convinced you’re trolling or genuinely really dumb.
I’m off, enjoy your monologue rants.
Strange reaction, no need for the personal attack. Enjoy your day.
They will eventually pay. This is similar to Australia.
You mean I won’t get
adsnews from Google anymore? Aww, shucks!I, for one, welcome this opportunity to spend more time on my local papers’ websites.
Greedy google doing greedy google things.
deleted by creator
Are you presuming that it never becomes popular? All three aspects vaguely describe the intermediary as being more popular than the news operator. If lemmy takes off and becomes the next Reddit and people go to it to catch up on the latest news it would be a factor.
Just because it does not fit today does not mean it isn’t a bad law. It would essentially apply to ANY site that becomes popular and links to a canadian news outlet.
deleted by creator
“There’s a difference between popular and powerful though” Not legally no the terms in this bill are very poorly defined. Really any “popular” / “large” website that links to Canadian news could be targeted with the open wording of the bill.
F*ck these bozos who dont understand how much this is going to screw canadian news sites. They just see google gets owned and support whatever tf it is like sheep. Awful law
I am amazed at how people don’t understand that vague law that takes out there “Current enemy” could be used against them down the road… THERE IS NO SUPPORT OF GOOGLE or facebook… it is a bad law that could be turned around to start playing whack mole with lemmy instances in the future, especially those run by a Canadian entity or on canadian hosting.
You’re lying.
Care to elaborate?
Answered here: https://lemmy.sdf.org/comment/485311
And the comment responding to it did a wonderful job of rebutting your point, so I won’t repeat it.
It did no such thing. The commenter doesn’t even seem to be aware that “Lemmy” isn’t a place or organization.
Lemmy is 1000 independent websites, run by 1000 different independent individuals. And no single website running Lemmy will be in a position to wield influence over news media organizations.
It didn’t actually. It is fascinating to find so many pro-authoritarian pro-billionaire tech fascist accounts on Lemmy.
Just because we want thoughtful regulation does not mean we support Meta and Alphabet. Why is this fascinating or surprising? Do you think the EFF is a huge fan of link taxes or Facebook?
That’s a whole lot of assumptions you’re making about me there, all because I said there are problems with a law. I guess Lemmy isn’t all that different from reddit after all.
I use TOR.
Oh? You are a pirate? Or maybe a journalist in an authoritarian country perhaps?
Nah, I use it to read the news.
But how will I find my Russian bot news websites now?! How dare they make me use a legitimate news source instead of finding whatever random “news” website spouted the same nonsense I search in google. /s
I think this will be a good thing in the long run to be honest
OH NO!
Anyway…
I’m not sure what they expected. An EU country (I can’t remember if it was Spain or Italy) tried this and Google just left. Then the news outlets begged for the law to be repealed. Google has a monopoly on search. If people can’t find you there, you’re gonna have a bad time because of your traffic free fall.
Australia with the kangaroos. Not Austria with the sound of music.
Austria with the Sound of Anschluss
There are other search engines, and bing became a lot better with the gpt integration
Sure, but the question is do the masses know about it? It’s all great to have principles until you have to consider how you’re gonna make payroll. We’ll see if I’m wrong, but I’m not sure that the world has moved away from Google domination yet.
I think with MS pushing edge and bing as suggest defaults some less tech savvy folks just use it. I think change is slow but people are looking for selfhosted solutions to avoid the “pray I don’t alter the deal” situations, and anonymous google free search such as whoogle. You also have phone OS makers building microG option and aurora store so you can get playstore apps without being forced into a google (tracking) account. Maybe those will not become mainstream, but we will see.
I’ll believe progress when anyone in my family even knows these things are an option. I’m a tech person and a fairly early adopter of tech things and I just learned whoogle was a thing this week and I don’t know anything about it besides it is a search engine.
Self hosted is great and all, but user testing my lemmy instance with non-technical and basically online people has been painful. I don’t doubt that eventually people like my sister will get to these options, but will they so it before these new organizations run out of money? That is the part I don’t think is likely. We are like 5 years ouylt before the masses get what federation is and see the light of self-hosting. Not many organizations have that kind of savings.
We will see where it all goes. maybe you don’t recall Dogpile? used to be huge as a search engine because it hit every other search engine and compiled the results. But google was giving better results so everyone jumped on that, but now google tries to only give you ad based results when possible, so google has become less useful as an info search engine. ChatGPT actually gives better concrete info when searching a topic, so I find myself not using google now. Bing now has ChatGPT ChatGPT built in so people mat find that more appealing, especially because MS almost forces it on you.
I’m old enough to remember dogpile. I learned about Google from an AOL manual. I so remember that I learned about it in middle school and it wasn’t commonly used until a few years later. And not dominant until I was well into college. People hated it I remember. I was the weirdo who fell in love immediately.
That’s my point. It’s not about if people will switch from Google. It’s about if news companies can stand the revenue loss for as long as that takes and it’ll take 2 years being extremely absurdly optimistic. Likely it’ll be 5 or more.
Well they were already losing, isn’t that why the change was being made to ad a revenue stream
am I understanding it correctly that if I’m in Canada and search for, say ArsTechnica, or other news source, Google will not show those results to me? Like they indexed the site and will omit it from a search?
Or are they pulling news in their “cards” or whatever they call them when they show previews and users never enter the site. Havent used Google Search in so long don’t even know what shenanigans they are up to.
As I understand it, they are pulling all links to Canadian news sources from search and from their cards, Google News, etc. So if you search for Canadian news you will not find it, unless international news organizations report it, and neither will you find world news reported by Canadian news channels and newspapers.
It might still be possible to use Google to search for Canadian news if you use a VPN and pretend to be in another country, especially if you do it from a browser that’s not logged in to your account.
I’m having a hard time believing that is the case for “search.” Cards and “google news” is another story.
As much as I dislike Google’s practices, they are doing a service by indexing where websites are and allowing them to be found based on keywords.
I feel if I go to “google.com” and search for <some Canadian news site> Google should show me links to <some Canadian news site> so that I can visit the site directly. Any law that prevents that is shooting Canadian news outlets in the foot.
Now if Google somehow finds what you’re looking for and does not take me directly to the website and instead parses the site, presents the information, and show its own ads, as opposed to ads hosted on <some Canadian news site>, then yeah - google can go play in traffic.
It’s a joke that Google calls this drivel news anyway. Good riddance.
