‘It scares the sh*t out of me’: Digital publishers worry about the future of journalism following Meta’s Canadian news ban
Digital publishers are sounding the alarm over Meta’s impact on news consumption and its potential consequences for the future of journalism in Australia.
The concerns have been amplified by recent events in Canada, where the tech giant made the controversial decision to block news content altogether in response to new legislation.
Canada’s Online News Act, which became law on June 22 and requires tech giants to pay publishers for news content, was also met with resistance by Google.
Mamamia CEO Nat Harvey recently spoke out about the growing unease surrounding Meta’s evolving approach to news distribution on its platforms.
Nat Harvey
On a panel at the Women in Media National Conference on Friday, Harvey said: “If Meta takes news content off their platform and [replaces it] with unsafe content, what happens to that social town square is very scary because it has an impact way outside of the platforms.
“It will destroy journalism in Australia because there will be fewer jobs [and] an impact on local publishers. I’m really worried.”
Harvey also highlighted the dangers of children encountering unchecked news on Meta, particularly its political implications. She cited examples like anti-vaccine misinformation during the Covid pandemic and polarised US political content to illustrate her concerns.
“If Meta takes news content off those platforms, my 14-year-old son is going to be taught what’s going on in the world by people who have bad intentions, who have not fact-checked anything. It scares the shit out of me.
“I can’t under-call how frightening the world could be when you’ve got kids getting content from platforms that is unchecked. That’s a bad place.”
However, she also noted that Mamamia would likely remain financially stable regardless of Meta’s next move due to its diverse revenue streams, including its numerous podcasts.
The Daily Aus co-founder Zara Seidler echoed Harvey’s concerns. Although the company is well-positioned, she is also apprehensive about the potential impact on news consumption for future generations.
Zara Seidler
Earlier this year, the independent publisher launched a second newsletter vertical in an effort to move its audience away from Meta in response to the uncertainty about the future of news on Facebook and Instagram.
Last week, it launched a third – the Good News Newsletter.
At the time, Seidler said the Good News Newsletter is a “dedicated space” for good news stories.
“Our fastest growing channel right now is newsletters, and that is about moving from that third-party data to the first-party data,” she said.
“So, in terms of our business, we have really meaningfully diversified very quickly and are in a really good position.”
However, like Harvey, she also emphasised the broader implications of Meta’s new policies on the future of journalism.
Citing University of Canberra research, she said: “Young people get their news from social media, and my issue with a potential meta ban is that we will have this absence of fact-check views.”
“We have a full-time fact-checker in our office versus influencers with opinions posting them as fact. And Meta will not ban those accounts and creators.
“So, as a business, I’m okay. For the country, I’m more concerned.”
In early 2021, Meta temporarily blocked all news content on its platform in Australia in response to the government’s proposed News Media Bargaining Code. This legislation aimed to require digital platforms like Meta and Google to pay news publishers for the content that appears on their sites.
Subscribe to the daily newsletter
This is already happening on X and the onus is on the public to fact check. With more people seeking news they deem “unbiased”, this was always going to be a shift that was coming whether major mastheads were ready for it or not.
User ID not verified.
Have your say