Facebook threatens to block Australians from sharing news over ACCC bargaining code
Facebook has threatened to block Australians from sharing news across its platforms in response to the ACCC’s proposed code which would see publishers able to bargain with tech giants for payment for their news content.
The sharing of personal content between family and friends wouldn’t be affected by the change, but Australian users would be unable to share both local and international news on Facebook or Instagram.
Will Easton, managing director for Facebook in Australia and New Zealand said the News Media Bargaining Code would have a negative impact on the publishers who are calling for the change, as well as the tech platforms.
Did ACCC and the Publishers seriously expect a different response from FB (and Google before them)? What the ham-fisted revenue sharing model they’ve come up with fails to acknowledge is that the relationship between publishers and FB/Google is mutually beneficial. FB gets “some” benefit from allowing users (and the publishers themselves) to share news content (although I don’t think it’s as great as the publishers seem to feel it is). And the publishers get their content in front of a massive audience they couldn’t hope to on their own as well as very significant traffic to their own sites. As FB’s local chief says, the revenue sharing model “would force Facebook to pay news organisations for content that the publishers voluntarily place on our platforms and at a price that ignores the financial value we bring publishers.” Quite.
I would absolutely prefer it if this came to pass.
This is a huge ACCC failure.
The ACCC should safeguard consumers not big media.
As a consumer I want the ACCC to protect my data and content rights.
For access to my data, I want legal restrictions on use. Facebook should not be allowed to simply waive all responsibility without condition.
I want unfiltered publishing OR my fair share.
Facebook stopped protecting my free speech with the launch of news feed. Algorithms editorialise my social media voice in every moment. So Facebook needs to be either accountable to media laws OR face a public class action for commercial license rights of our collective images and content. The real content and data comes from people – not news media.
The ACCC is supposed to stop monopolies like Facebook from taking all the money, paying no tax and carrying zero consumer responsibility.
These platforms do not directly benefit from news.
What they offer is a concentrated volume of audience that is offered more choice in where they receive their news from, whereas previously it was mostly the FTA networks and major news publishers only.
What these platforms have done is dilute the distribution advantage that these traditional platforms held by offering more choice to the end audience. Hence why they are crying foul.
“This is not our first choice – it is our last”
Hate to get technical, but choosing to pay journalists for access to their content is actually the last choice Facebook is deciding to make here.
Define what you mean by access to their content? In terms of choices – news publishers “choose” to have a Facebook page, they “choose” to post their content on FB to reach a wider audience, they “choose” to have social media share buttons on their website so people can amplify. If this brought in monthly active users and revenue to Facebook than they wouldn’t be blocking. It’s clearly replaceable with content from friends, family, pages and groups. Why should they be forced to pay millions to billions in Australia for (mostly trash) publishers voluntarily post on their platforms? Risking their global business for 16m people in Australia?
Can’t really blame news publishers for trying to gain value now the duopoly has been built off their content. (Yes, its not all built on their content – but lets not split hairs, its a percentage)
To be perfectly fair, the content providers should be back-paid that percentage from when Google and FB first launched in Oz to represent the share of input into their ad software dominance.
Wont happen of course as the news publishers walked into this mess. This deal is a steal though for Google and FB – they should just pay it and move on. Its essentially a parking ticket that legitimises their control of the ad industry.
This is rubbish. Facebook was already an empire before news businesses could post their stories on platform. People were more interested in seeing what their “friends” or long lost school acquaintances were up to. Also what does Instagram have to do with news and journalism? People would rather follow their passions and influencers. Don’t see how News Corp or Nine add any value to Instagram and 13m Australians who use the platform?
There is also this belief from people with NFI about digital advertising that news content is valuable for FB algorithms, building data profiles and selling advertising – this is way off how Facebook actually works. Transactional data and shopping signals is what matters to them.
I assume you work for Facebook but this purist comment?
And give society some credit. Yes a large portion of people are on platforms to look at old friends, influencers etc. But the upcoming generation is only in there – and they can and are being served news in different ways.
Sit in that for sec and ponder.
Media orgnisations currently voluntarily give their content over to FB no?
Like a comment on a similar FB/ACCC article stated, it literally takes 3 lines of code to stop it being shared on Google…
Pretty obviously a politically motivated shakedown (hence the $150k minimum..) to ensure the media keeps pushing the narrative the Govt. wants them to push (or in News’ case openly propaganda for the Govt.).