So, if I randomly generate headlines of varying rabid mania, I am not liable for defamation because I know they are random rubbish, but I still get the ad revenue ?
Isn't this the business model for all current online news sources ..
It does feel however it ought to be illegal - much like pissing in the drinking water.
This is essentially the whole argument Jerry Falwell made when Larry Flynt ran a spot in Hustler "accusing" him of having sex with his mother in an outhouse. The Rehnquist court unanimously booted the case. The First Amendment ain't easy. This kind of shit is often the price we pay for it.
Horses were great. Wading through streets full of horseshit wasn't.
We built boardwalks / pavements and industries sprang up collecting street dung and moving it to the fields and gun factories.
The algorithms run by Facebook et al are I suppose "boardwalks" in some sense as you don't need to steer off them unless you want (and there are definite left and right boardwalks available ! :-). Also worth noting that eventually governments took over doing boardwalk like things.
I wonder what other industries we shall see / can already see trying to deal with an already over stretched analogy
Isn't this the business model for all current online news sources ..
It does feel however it ought to be illegal - much like pissing in the drinking water.