Mark Zuckerberg really does seem determined to make a goose of himself. He’s back, huffing and puffing and pushing out his skinny little chest, swigging from the barbecue sauce bottle and trying to intimidate lawmakers in the US and Canada. Word to the wise, Zuck: when you’re in a hole, stop digging.
The issue at hand is the sharing of news content on Facebook. Basically, media companies are cheesed off that their stuff is being published for free on Facebook. Facebook reckons it’s not a publisher, so it doesn’t have to pay copyright holders.
Australia led the world in tackling the issue, with its News Media Bargaining Code, which forced Facebook (and Google) to negotiate content supply deals with media outlets.
As you can imagine, the Zuck was not happy at having to part with a cent of his mind-boggling fortune. He’s even unhappier now that North American jurisdictions are taking aim as well.
Facebook has warned it may block the sharing of news content on its platform in Canada over concerns about legislation that would compel digital platforms to pay news publishers.
ABC Australia
ABC Australia
Facebook parent company Meta has threatened to remove news from the platform if US Congress passes a proposal aimed at making it easier for news organisations to negotiate collectively with companies like Alphabet’s Google and Facebook.
Wait, wait — we’ve heard this one before, downunder.
In early 2021, Facebook tried the same strong-arm tactics on Australia — no doubt figuring, like the Chinese Communist Party, that little old Australia would be an easy pushover.
It did not go well for Facebook. Not only did no one care that they weren’t getting legacy media news on Facebook, the ban resulted in a raft of collateral damage, with charities, emergency services and even weather services wiped off the Facebook map. In just a week, the internet giant backed down and slunk to the bargaining table. It appears the whole affair did not go unnoticed in other parts of the world.
The Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA) would allow small and local news publishers to collectively negotiate with the largest US tech companies for compensation for access to the journalistic content that helps generates ad revenue on those platforms.
Time for Facebook to flex its weedy muscles again.
Meta spokesperson Andy Stone tweeted that the company would be forced to consider removing news if the law was passed, “rather than submit to government-mandated negotiations that unfairly disregard any value we provide to news outlets through increased traffic and subscriptions”.
He said the proposal failed to recognise that publishers and broadcasters put content on the platform because “it benefits their bottom line — not the other way around”.
These are the same arguments Facebook tried to use in Australia. They’re not entirely wrong, either: in fact, media organisations made a rod for their own backs when they rushed to get on Facebook in the first place.
I’m also not inclined to exactly stand up and cheer for the legacy media, either.
The News Media Alliance, a trade group representing newspaper publishers, is urging Congress to add the bill to the defence bill, arguing that “local papers cannot afford to endure several more years of Big Tech’s use and abuse, and time to take action is dwindling.”
“If Congress does not act soon, we risk allowing social media to become America’s de facto local newspaper,” the group said.
More than two dozen groups including the American Civil Liberties Union, Public Knowledge and the Computer and Communications Industry Association on Monday urged Congress not to approve the local news bill, saying it would “create an ill-advised antitrust exemption for publishers and broadcasters”.
They argued the bill does not require “funds gained through negotiation or arbitration will even be paid to journalists”.
ABC Australia
ABC Australia
Still, watching Facebook punch itself in the face again is comedy gold enough for me not to care.
