Australia

3651 readers

26 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
Politics, post it to Australian Politics
World News/Events, post it to World News
A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

lodion@aussie.zone

Fluid@aussie.zone

bestusername@aussie.zone

eatham@aussie.zone

Parliament delivers a performance piece of legislative 'enshittification' that raises more questions than answers (www.abc.net.au)

submitted 1 month ago by Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone to c/australia@aussie.zone

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Annabel Crabb's analysis of parliamentary goings on this week.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Certainly is better. But i don't think it needs a 'technology industry' specific term.

Old terms like market monopolisation, or corruption of the public sphere.

Or something like those are better, because nothing the tech platforms have done is new, their tactics aren't different from any other company seeking to dominate their respective product market. The key difference being the speed at which their product travels around the world.

[–] zero_gravitas@aussie.zone 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

You make a reasonable point. I think there is difference, though, which is the degree to which 'the customer is the product' for these platforms, and that's a key ingredient in Doctorow's original post:

Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die.

Sure, advertising is nothing new, but the degree to which these platforms can target content and ads to the individual is qualitatively different to 'old media'. Emphasis on 'the customer', singular, being the product, not 'the readers/viewers' as a whole.

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 2 points 1 month ago

I's talking about products in general, not new v old media. I actually had Jack Welch of GE in my mind when i wrote the comment yesterday.

That doctorow was a longer read than i's expecting, clicked on a lot of links as well. This is why its taken soblong for me to reply :p I really liked the part about 'heating'.

The heating part made me think about how youtube rarely showed me videos from channels i'd liked previously, i had to go looking for them, while the recommended videos showed so much weird crap.

I still think its no different to the 'ever lasting search for the latest eFficiEnCeeeeee saving' every MBA learns by rote.

But i take your point, User Attention is what these companies are selling. Like good little MBA's they are doing everything they can to exploit that value from the user attention assets they have, and are singularly failing to build any new assets of any value.