[HN Gopher] CRTC Confirms Bill C-11 Can Pressure Internet Platfo...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       CRTC Confirms Bill C-11 Can Pressure Internet Platforms to
       Manipulate Algorithms
        
       Author : walterbell
       Score  : 21 points
       Date   : 2022-06-23 14:21 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.michaelgeist.ca)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.michaelgeist.ca)
        
       | 908B64B197 wrote:
       | This makes no sense at all.
       | 
       | > "We want Canadians to find Canadian music. How best to do it?
       | How will you do it? I don't want to manipulate your algorithm. I
       | want you to manipulate it to produce a particular outcome. And
       | then we will have hearings to decide what are the best ways and
       | explore it."
       | 
       | Why would you need to tweak an algorithm to nudge people toward a
       | certain kind of (government approved) music?
       | 
       | People simply... listen to the music they like! Pink Floyd and
       | The Beatles sure didn't need one to become popular in their
       | respective countries.
       | 
       | > Scott's comments confirm what Rodriguez has misleadingly denied
       | and Bill C-11 critics have maintained for months: the bill's
       | discoverability requirements will obviously require algorithmic
       | manipulation in order to prioritize Canadian content.
       | 
       | Why do they need to do that in the first place? Here in America,
       | people buy American content because they want to see it. Same in
       | France. Why are Canadians not buying their own content?
        
         | jollybean wrote:
         | This is a bit glib, but that's understandable.
         | 
         | It's not a truly 'free market' for anything, and content is no
         | exception.
         | 
         | 'Free Market' idealism overwhelmingly favours 'large open
         | economies' because they'll basically gobble up smaller open
         | economies next to them.
         | 
         | Literally the only large industries that exist in open
         | economies next to much larger open economies are those that are
         | protected: Banking, Telecoms etc..
         | 
         | If laws were changed such that US companies could buy Canadian
         | Telcos - then even if Canadian Telcos were _way_ more efficient
         | (they are not, but supposed they were), then US giants would
         | eat the Canadian Telcos instantly. The deals would be signed
         | literally the day the law passed.
         | 
         | Sometimes local cultural resilience is enough, but it's not
         | that common.
         | 
         | In Italy, they don't go to Starbucks or have a lot of America
         | food, because theirs is just better in every way.
         | 
         | But in Tunisia, almost everything that Tunisians do is quickly
         | getting replaced by Western products.
         | 
         | It's weirdly easy to convince young minds in the developing
         | world that 'all their stuff is stupid' next to Coke, KFC,
         | McDonald's, Nike. It's almost shocking to see the inter
         | generational divide in these places, with elderly people being
         | of 'some culture' where the kids are almost 100% cheap copies
         | of bad Western brands.
         | 
         | Coca Cola has immense money and power to influence, lobby,
         | market. There are a few specific Tunisians teas that are just
         | 'local products' that don't have an industry cabal behind them.
         | Eventually, they will be replaced by Coke.
         | 
         | In Canada specifically what I have noticed is that multi-
         | generational Canadians have some semblance of what Canadian
         | culture is, they'll know Neil Young etc. but a lot of migrant
         | kids, they don't have much of a basis. They are far more likely
         | to buy into the most recent American pop culture trends aka
         | Kardashians. Because Canada has high levels of migration, that
         | becomes a unique problem.
         | 
         | Distribution and creation of most content is hugely
         | industrialized, people are not 'famous' because they write a
         | good song, my god no - it's an industry. Getting on the talk
         | shows, published articles, etc. all of that is a business.
         | 
         | There are just so many factors that contribute to content and
         | distribution they are hard to enumerate and they are mostly
         | industrial, this idea of 'free choice' is barely applicable.
         | 
         | I actually fully support CANCON rules for the same reason they
         | have existed in the past.
         | 
         | Not for most industries, but anything cultural, yes. And of
         | course as long as people can actively chose to get the content
         | they want as well.
        
         | fartcannon wrote:
         | Anglophone Canadians and Americans come from the same places.
         | So the cultural bridge is easy to cross and the American
         | culture machine is prolific.
         | 
         | If we do nothing, Canadians will be overwhelmed by the size of
         | the American industry. If we ban it out right, that would be
         | lame.
         | 
         | So what's left? They chose the easy one: force some Canadian
         | content.. It works, I guess. But it would be much cooler if
         | there was more money to spend on developing more Canadian
         | culture.
         | 
         | We should have nationalised all our resources, but... Here we
         | are.
         | 
         | I always think about Avro Arrow, and Blackberry. We can't have
         | anything nice because we are too weak.
         | 
         | All that said, several of my favourite childhood bands are
         | Canadian! The Tea Party, Our Lady Peace, Tragically Hip, I
         | Mother Earth. Yay, the 90s.
        
           | 908B64B197 wrote:
           | > on developing more Canadian culture.
           | 
           | You can't really artificially grow a culture. If people want
           | it, they'll seek it and pay for it.
           | 
           | > I always think about Avro Arrow, and Blackberry. We can't
           | have anything nice because we are too weak.
           | 
           | The Arrow was a plane without a purpose (chasing after
           | supersonic bombers when everyone had moved to ICBMs?).
           | 
           | BlackBerry's failure was internal. They failed to innovate
           | and keep their head start despite years of market dominance.
           | By the time they rollout the Storm at the same time as the
           | iPhone 3G it was clear BlackBerry was at least two years
           | behind Apple, if not more. Despite being hugely profitable
           | they could simply not attract talent in the same way Apple
           | could (and were not competitive with comp at all). Going from
           | BlackBerry to Apple was seen as a great career move, the
           | reverse almost unheard of.
        
           | triceratops wrote:
           | > If we do nothing, Canadians will be overwhelmed by the size
           | of the American industry
           | 
           | I don't even follow popular music that closely, and yet I've
           | found it astonishing how many popular music artists are
           | Canadian. Drake, The Weeknd, Nickelback, Avril Lavigne,
           | Celine Dion, Justin Bieber, Shania Twain are just the ones I
           | can name off the top of my head. Canada's population is
           | smaller than California so it seems like it's punching above
           | its weight.
        
             | 908B64B197 wrote:
             | > I don't even follow popular music that closely, and yet
             | I've found it astonishing how many popular music artists
             | are Canadian. Drake, The Weeknd, Nickelback, Avril Lavigne,
             | Celine Dion, Justin Bieber, Shania Twain are just the ones
             | I can name off the top of my head. Canada's population is
             | smaller than California so it seems like it's punching
             | above its weight.
             | 
             | I don't. They have special laws where broadcasters (radio,
             | tv) have to air a certain amount of government approved
             | programming. So no matter what sells or what people want to
             | hear, the government will revoke their license if they
             | don't promote these whitelisted artists. A show about
             | rap/hip-hop basically has to have Drake or Bieber to be
             | legal.
        
       | jollybean wrote:
       | This is completely the wrong debate. 'Algorithm or Not' it
       | doesn't matter.
       | 
       | The issue is what is public good, what should gov. be doing, what
       | should they not be doing with respect to content and regulation.
       | 
       | The concept of 'algorithm' is not important.
        
       | donmcronald wrote:
       | > We want Canadians to find Canadian music. How best to do it?
       | How will you do it? I don't want to manipulate your algorithm. I
       | want you to manipulate it to produce a particular outcome.
       | 
       | So basically "I don't want to switch your Spotify playlist to
       | Justin Beiber. I want _you_ to switch your playlist to Justin
       | Beiber. " Lol.
       | 
       | I think the issue here is that Canadian content creators actually
       | needed the protectionist laws back when a few big media companies
       | controlled everything. Those companies could make better margins
       | by buying cheap US content and re-broadcasting it. There was no
       | incentive to create Canadian content because getting it published
       | / broadcasted would have been extremely difficult even if it was
       | better content than what was being produced in the US.
       | 
       | The internet has solved the problem of publication and
       | distribution, so getting locked out of the space by a huge media
       | company just doesn't happen anymore. However, that kind of
       | protectionism has an ongoing, collateral effect. It created an
       | industry that's reliant on participating, and being successful
       | with, a subpar product and the only way they can continue to
       | compete is to have the government force us to buy their stuff.
       | 
       | Take YouTube as an example of a more even playing field. Yeah,
       | they surface content, but, for all intents and purposes, they're
       | not discriminating against who can or can't upload a video.
       | They're not preventing you from being successful by promoting
       | someone else's content. They're promoting someone else's content
       | because it's better than yours.
       | 
       | In Canada it's laissez faire (hands off) for a lot of critical
       | infrastructure (communications, highways, insurance), but full on
       | subsidies and support for non-essential things like
       | entertainment. When people complain about government waste, stuff
       | like this should be at the top of the list.
        
         | 908B64B197 wrote:
         | > Take YouTube as an example of a more even playing field.
         | Yeah, they surface content, but, for all intents and purposes,
         | they're not discriminating against who can or can't upload a
         | video. They're not preventing you from being successful by
         | promoting someone else's content. They're promoting someone
         | else's content because it's better than yours.
         | 
         | Ironically, some of the highest paid youtubers and twitch
         | streamers are Canadians (I'm thinking of Linus Tech Tip among
         | other things) and they didn't any help at all from these
         | government subsidies.
        
         | jollybean wrote:
         | Your argument is missing the 'power' part of the argument.
         | 
         | The internet makes it easy to 'put something on youtube' but
         | that's pedantic.
         | 
         | The issue is distribution power, which large companies still
         | have via advertising, relationships, placements etc..
         | 
         | Every time you see an actor on TV, like a talk show - it's a
         | form of marketing.
         | 
         | They are there at the behest of the studio to 'sell' a film,
         | book or whatever.
         | 
         | Those shows are often owned by the same networks.
         | 
         | Those are systems of incredible power.
         | 
         | Theoretically, someone on YouTube could make something viral
         | that reaches the whole world, that's great, but it's not how
         | the world works, and especially not for anything professionally
         | produced.
         | 
         | It's a tricky subject and I'm not sure anyone is talking about
         | it in the right way.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-06-23 23:02 UTC)