Dutch Gov. Wants To Tax Online Media To Fund Print

Godefricus writes "Outrage ensued among Dutch techie and media websites, after a government report advised that the dwindling print media industry should be financially supported by the online industry (Google translation; Dutch original here). The idea is to help the old media fund 'innovative initiatives.' The suggested implementation of the plan is by taxing a percentage of each ISP subscription, and give the money to the papers. The report, which was solicited by the Dutch parliament and written by a committee of its members, specifically states that 'news and the gathering of news stories is not free, and the public must be made aware of that.' The report is not conclusive, but from here it's just one step toward a legislative proposal. Both industries are largely privately owned in The Netherlands, and the current government is center-left wing. Who needs an RIAA if you can build one into your government? And hey, why invest in the future if you can invest in the past?"

Comments

Slashdot is, as usual, behind the times

[SigILL]

The responsible minister already said "no" (Dutch language article and I'm too lazy to translate; learn Dutch you slackers :)).

Re:Slashdot is, as usual, behind the times

[Traa]

Come one, you gotta like a language in which "angstschreeuw" and "slechtstschrijvend" are perfectly valid words. It's like Perl (only less regular)! :)

angstscreeuw = fear scream (one word in Dutch) = 8 consonants in a row
slechtstscrijvend = worst written (one word in Dutch) = 9 consonants in a row

some more fun examples from the Dutch language:
koeieuier = Cow's udder = 7 vowels in a row
Jazzzinger = Jazz Singer = 3 z's in a row

Re:Slashdot is, as usual, behind the times

[xonen]

"koeieuier"

According to new (1996) spelling this is supposed to be 'koeienuier'.

Lobbyists

[MathFox]

Actually it is a report from the newspaper lobby and the responsible minister has already spoken out against the proposal.

Re:Lobbyists

[Godefricus]

No it is not. It is a report from a formal and powerful committee from within the parliament (Commissie Brinkman.) The minister did make an informal comment - thankfully - against this proposal shortly after receiving the report, but we have yet to await his final decisions -- and that of his civil servants et al. This could well be a matter of months.

Re:Bad idea.

[Nefarious Wheel]

On the other hand I would REALLY like for someone to figure out a way for journalism to be a viable career...

Ok, blowing all my mods to address this one.

In the company I work for, we use trained journalists, and we use them for one purpose - and it's not writing internal newsletters. We use them because they know how to write. We have a constant need for people to write about stuff we sell and do in order to inform our potential customers. That text needs to be engaging, with correct syntax, punctuation and spelling. Do you know how rare it is in even a large technology company to find people who know how to construct a paragraph correctly, to say nothing of making it readable?

Mind you, they need to know a little about technology. Not a huge amount, but enough to ask sensible questions in an interview.

You might end up being called a "market analyst" rather than a "reporter", but work is definitely there, and it's the same sort of investigative reporting you were trained for. But the pay is probably better and interviews are easier to come by. It may not be the discovery of Watergate, but there's hope for you that isn't spelled Wendy's.