Read on Twitter
Thread on FB news ban:
I am one of the relatively few people in Aus who is an admin of a popular news site’s Facebook page. I regularly create FB posts from our articles/podcasts and moderate the comments from users. I’m also graduating with a Master of Public Policy in June...
I am one of the relatively few people in Aus who is an admin of a popular news site’s Facebook page. I regularly create FB posts from our articles/podcasts and moderate the comments from users. I’m also graduating with a Master of Public Policy in June...
so I have many opinions on the new laws affecting the area I work in.
Firstly, the code is not the instrument I would have chosen to support independent journalism in Aus...
Firstly, the code is not the instrument I would have chosen to support independent journalism in Aus...
As @Lizzie_OShea wrote in @OverlandJournal, a system of public tax + spend similar to PhD scholarships would’ve been better than a system of private transfers with, as @withMEAA points out, no guaranteed reinvestment in journalism. https://overland.org.au/2020/12/the-trouble-with-the-media-bargaining-code/
Indeed, my boss and I wrote this submission to the Senate inquiry into media diversity advocating an Australia Council-style independent fund allocating grants for public interest journalism, possibly funded by a tax on tech giants: https://theconversation.com/the-conversations-submission-to-the-senate-inquiry-into-media-diversity-in-australia-152011
Instead the government proposed a system of arbitrated negotiations. @CaseyNewton does a good job here of explaining some of the oddities of the specific rules: https://www.platformer.news/p/australias-bad-bargain-with-platforms
Having said that, I have been struck by the virulence of the backlash against the code by some here on Twitter, particularly those on the left.
A strange design + a missed opportunity for something better doesn’t make the code abhorrent. https://twitter.com/dancrowley99/status/1362285425335832576
A strange design + a missed opportunity for something better doesn’t make the code abhorrent. https://twitter.com/dancrowley99/status/1362285425335832576
Firstly, it doesn’t give credit where it’s due: thx to sustained advocacy, our conservative govt now accepts:
A) Google and Facebook’s monopoly power is bad and requires govt intervention
B) Journalism should be the beneficiary of such intervention because its a public good
A) Google and Facebook’s monopoly power is bad and requires govt intervention
B) Journalism should be the beneficiary of such intervention because its a public good
Secondly, the code’s implications would probably be (quite modest) net positive. Large multinationals, whose impact on the public sphere is currently net negative, would be forced to redistribute some of their profits (albeit in a sub-optimal way)...
to A) large commercial media, some of whom can be unscrupulous + tbh often a net negative to society — I take @rgcooke and others’ critique of our sector seriously
B) the public broadcasters
C) regional media
D) independents like TC, Guardian, Crikey, Schwartz etc
B) the public broadcasters
C) regional media
D) independents like TC, Guardian, Crikey, Schwartz etc
so I guess the crux of it is: do you so revile A as to deprive B, C + D of extra revenue that will otherwise stay in Silicon Valley?
I get that you shouldn’t have to choose but that’s politics — crummy govts offering you sub-par options. I don’t see a better outcome from here
I get that you shouldn’t have to choose but that’s politics — crummy govts offering you sub-par options. I don’t see a better outcome from here
The brinksmanship atm does pose real dangers, esp for small + new publishers who often grow their audience via FB.
I get the feeling of this meme — no news + a compromise scheme feels lousy... https://twitter.com/joshbutler/status/1362177955997257729
I get the feeling of this meme — no news + a compromise scheme feels lousy... https://twitter.com/joshbutler/status/1362177955997257729
But FB DOESN’T HAVE TO BAN NEWS. It’s a massive overreaction to a scheme will cost them a small fraction of their $.
The shock tactics are simply to make an example of Aus to other nations that seek to redistribute their profits, potentially in better, more progressive ways
The shock tactics are simply to make an example of Aus to other nations that seek to redistribute their profits, potentially in better, more progressive ways
Seeing the government cock up their flagship media policy might be funny to some, but we won’t be laughing for long if the precedent is set that multinationals can threaten governments over moderate reforms until they roll over and let the gravy train run unabated.
Final word: if the laws were better e.g. taxing tech giants’ revenue to fund public grants for journalism, I think Facebook would be at least as likely to pull its news, if not more.
The fact it is kicking up such a stink over this plan should be a warning: buckle up.
The fact it is kicking up such a stink over this plan should be a warning: buckle up.
