Australians should brace for news to disappear from their Facebook and Instagram feeds, experts warn, should the government try to force Meta to negotiate to pay local media companies.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The tech giant announced on Friday that it was shutting down its dedicated news tab in Australia, and wouldn't renew its multi-million dollar funding deals with domestic media companies to pay for news content.
The announcement has panicked a media industry set to lose a major revenue source, and set up a battle between Meta and the Australian government, who has the power under the News Media Bargaining Code to "designate" digital platforms and force them to negotiate with news businesses.
But Professor Derek Wilding, co-director of the University of Technology Sydney's Centre for Media Transition, suggested that Meta ultimately has the upper hand.
He warned that there is a "high chance" Meta will ban all news content on its platforms, to avoid being designated under the code.
"And if that news content isn't there, then clearly on this approach [under the news media bargaining code] there's no obligation to pay for something," Prof. Wilding said.
Even if Meta is forced into arbitration, Prof Wilding said the company could cut or downgrade news content so much on its platforms that "any payment [to media companies] is so low as to not really justify all of the work that's involved in getting to that arbitration point in any way".
"So I think for those reasons, while the government does have the power to designate, it's likely to be a hollow result at the end of what could be quite a lengthy process," he said.
A proven track record
Meta has refused to wade into whether it will pull all news content in Australia if "designated", with a spokesperson telling ACM that "we're not going to comment on hypothetical situations".
"There is no change to publishers' ability to use Facebook and they can continue to benefit from our free tools and products which they can voluntarily use should they want to," a Meta spokesperson said.
But the company has already shown its willingness to take such action when its back is against the wall.
Meta blocked news across Facebook and Instagram in Canada last year after the government passed a bill forcing tech giants to strike fair commercial deals with media outlets for the news shared to their platforms.
Do we really want these social media platforms propagating untrusted news, when we have a whole profession of people out there whose job it is working within clear guard rails to report on things?
- Rod Sims, former ACCC chair
In 2021, when the Coalition government first proposed the media bargaining code, Meta similarly prevented users from sharing or viewing news content across its platforms in Australia; a sweeping move that saw hundreds of emergency services and government pages also blocked.
At the time in Australia, Meta wrote in an online post that "the proposed law fundamentally misunderstands the relationship between our platform and publishers who use it to share news content."
"It has left us facing a stark choice: attempt to comply with a law that ignores the realities of this relationship, or stop allowing news content on our services in Australia. With a heavy heart, we are choosing the latter," the statement continued.
News media to pay the price either way
While Meta voluntarily came to the table and struck confidential agreements with multiple publishers, rumoured to be worth around $70 million a year, Dr Rob Nicholls, a visiting fellow at UTS Law School, agreed that there isn't a world where the government can force Meta to do something it doesn't want to when it comes to its news content.
As Meta wrote in an online post last Friday, news makes up less than what 3 per cent of people globally see in their Facebook feed.
"Meta exiting news in Australia will, if Meta is right, barely affect advertising revenues in Australia," Dr Nicholls said.
Multiple media companies, including this newspaper's publisher ACM, have spoken out against Meta's decision to stop paying for news content, urging the Albanese government to take action against the tech giant.
But Dr Nicholls warned that these publishers may end up with no funding from Meta, and no way of sharing their news content across two of the country's biggest social media platforms, should Meta feel like it has no choice but to de-platform all news.
"Push as hard as you can for Meta to change its mind and tell the government that Meta should change its mind. But at the same time: do some sums," Dr Nicholls said, when asked what his message was to media companies.
"If you've got no presence on Facebook and Insta, how would that affect traffic on your website and your current business model? And is it worth losing that for the sake of the revenue that you'll probably never get regardless of how much noise you make?"
Where to next?
Former Australian Competition and Consumer Commission chair, Rod Sims, has slammed Meta, telling The Canberra Times that if the company chooses to pull news off their platforms entirely, they'll be "putting their profit over Australian society, which is pretty awful".
"... I think if you look about digital platforms generally, they seem to run their own race, seem to want to ignore government, seem to think they're above government," Mr Sims said.
At a press conference following Meta's announcement on Friday, Assistant Treasurer Stephen Jones indicated the government will take action under the media bargaining code. A government spokesperson reiterated to The Canberra Times that the government was still seeking advice from Treasury and the ACCC as it considers its next steps.
But Mr Sims - one of the key architects of the news media bargaining code - said the Albanese government should look beyond the code to other legislation they can introduce or amend to regulate the tech giant.
"If they take down all news, then how does the government deal with that? ... Do we really want these social media platforms propagating untrusted news, when we have a whole profession of people out there whose job it is working within clear guard rails to report on things?" Mr Sims said.
"We need to do more thinking and, of course, it's up to the executive of the day to decide what to put before Parliament ... But we can't run a country being scared of large international companies that put profit before all else."