Should Google pay for news?

I won't actually try and answer that question. It's a complex one. In theory you should pay for what you use. It is also true that most people will always attempt to search for something which is "free" or, at very least, the least expensive. 

This is particularly true of "news" which comes and goes at such speed. That makes me much more concerned about what might happen if Google decides to reduce the amount of news Downunderites can access. 

Google has reportedly already agreed to pay authorities in France for news content. It would be interesting to know if the French are now getting the same news services they were before this happened. My guess is that they are not. It will have been subtle. People will not have noticed a difference but if Google is paying then they will choose and they may choose less. Their influence may become greater rather than less.  

Not paying? Put up anything that comes your way. Paying? Then pick and choose what you pay for. 

A lot of news is already behind a pay wall. The mainstream media has been an enormous beneficiary of the internet. They depend on search engines to send readers their way. The "fake news media" has also been an enormous beneficiary. They also depend on search engines to send readers their way.  

Media giants, like Newscorp and Time-Warner, have already chosen what we will see and how we will see it. In Downunder the government funds the "ABC" and "SBS".  The first is supposed to provide a "balanced" news service about both local and international affairs. The second, the "SBS", is short for "Special Broadcasting Service". It is supposed to concentrate on multi-cultural and international content and also to do it in a "balanced" way. Debate rages about whether that "balance" actually exists in either organisation.  

I get news from many sources. Some of it comes from people in the middle of the situation being reported. What they say is often very different from what is said in the media. That's understandable for many reasons - not least of them time, resources, local understanding, other available information, personal bias and much more.  These people don't have a big media boss to please, nor do they have to be concerned about international diplomacy. They are attempting to deal in what they believe to be the facts.  Despite that bias still exists.

My personal view is that "balance" does not exist anywhere.We are short-changed where news is concerned. Asking the media giants to pay is unlikely to change that.