Lexi Webster
In February 2021, Facebook blocked Australian users from sharing or viewing news content on its platform. This was in response to Australia's proposed Media Bargaining law, which sought to make Facebook and Google negotiate with news companies for content payment. Facebook argued that the law penalized them for content they did not take or ask for and that it failed to recognize the relationship between their platform and publishers. The ban affected not just news publishers but also international news sites, government health departments, charities, and even Facebook's own pages. Critics of the ban highlighted the spread of misinformation and the difficulty in accessing reliable sources. Facebook later reinstated some inadvertently blocked pages and stated its commitment to public interest journalism and collaboration with publishers.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Reason for the ban | Facebook said that the Australian government's proposed new Media Bargaining law seeks to "penalise Facebook for content it didn't take or ask for" |
| Effect of the ban | Australians are restricted from posting news links and sharing or viewing Australian and international news content on Facebook |
| Pages affected | Government, health departments, emergency services, charities, politicians, sports groups, non-news organisations, welfare groups, satire news outlets |
| Pages reinstated | Government, public safety, education, satirical news, women's legal services, weather forecasting |
| Pages still affected | Australian and international news sites, health organisations, welfare groups, trade unions |
| Facebook's response | Facebook said it was working to restore other sites that had been blocked inadvertently |
| Australian government's response | The Australian government criticised the move, saying it demonstrated the "immense market power of these digital social giants" |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Facebook's stance on the Australian news media code
Facebook has also argued that the law does not encourage innovation and collaboration between digital platforms and news organisations. Instead, it penalises Facebook for content it did not take or ask for. The company has said that it was prepared to launch Facebook News in Australia and increase investments with local publishers, but only with the right rules in place.
Facebook's head in Australia and New Zealand, Will Easton, stated that news content accounts for less than 4% of content in people's news feeds, while Facebook accounted for 5.1 billion clicks to Australian news websites in 2020. Facebook believes it offers much more benefit to news companies than the other way around.
Facebook's chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, has had discussions with Australia's treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, about the code, expressing concerns about its interpretation. Facebook has also joined lobbying efforts, hiring experienced lobbyists who know Prime Minister Scott Morrison personally.
A Guide to Flying from the UK to Australia
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Australian government's response
The Australian government has strongly criticised Facebook's ban on Australians viewing or sharing news, with Australia's treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, stating that the ban on news information had a "huge community impact". Frydenberg also said that the government was committed to passing the law, and that Facebook's eleventh-hour banning action had damaged the site's reputation. He further added, "What they're effectively saying to Australians is: 'You will not find content on our platform which comes from an organisation that employs professional journalists, which has editorial policies, which has fact-checking processes'".
About 17 million Australians visit Facebook every month, and the ban has made it more difficult for people to access reliable sources, increasing the influence of bad and misleading information. Facebook's action also denied Australians access to many key government agencies, including police and emergency services, health departments, and the Bureau of Meteorology. Welfare groups such as Women's Health Tasmania and charities were also impacted.
Facebook's ban also affected some non-news sites, including the West Australian fire and emergency services page, the WA opposition leader's page, and several charities. Facebook later released a statement saying that these pages had been "inadvertently impacted" and would be reinstated.
The Australian government has indicated that it is open to discussions and potential changes to the code. Treasurer Frydenberg stated that he had constructive discussions with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who expressed concerns with aspects of the code. Frydenberg said that the government would listen to Zuckerberg's views and discuss them with the prime minister and colleagues before making decisions.
The Australian government has also pointed out that Facebook, like Google, had been negotiating pay deals with local organisations. Google has recently signed payment deals with major Australian media outlets, including Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. This highlights that it is possible to reach agreements that recognise the value provided by the platforms while also compensating news organisations for their content.
Orcas in Australia: Where to Find Them
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Impact on access to reliable information
Facebook's decision to ban news content in Australia has had a significant impact on the access to reliable information for Australians. About 17 million Australians visit Facebook every month, and for many, it is their primary source of news. The ban has resulted in people being unable to access news content from Australian and international news organisations on Facebook. This includes content from government health departments, emergency services, charities, and other non-news organisations.
Facebook's news ban in Australia was implemented in response to the country's proposed Media Bargaining Law, which sought to penalise Facebook for content it did not take or ask for. The law aimed to address the relationship between digital platforms and news organisations, with Facebook arguing that it was being penalised for content it did not create or seek. As a result of the ban, Facebook restricted Australian publishers and users from sharing or viewing news content on its platform.
The impact of the ban on access to reliable information has been significant. It has been criticised as anti-democratic and authoritarian, with critics arguing that it has made it more difficult for Australians to access trusted news sources. Additionally, the ban has inadvertently blocked non-news content, including pages of government agencies, emergency services, and charities. This has led to concerns that Facebook is limiting access to important and reliable information for its Australian users.
Facebook has acknowledged that its ban has inadvertently impacted pages beyond news content and has worked to restore access to some of these sites. However, the ban continues to affect the ability of Australians to access a diverse range of information sources, particularly those who rely primarily on Facebook for their news. This has resulted in an increased presence of misleading and inaccurate information, with a rise in posts containing false claims about the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines.
The ban has also impacted Facebook's ability to collaborate with fact-checking organisations. Russell Skelton, of ABC's fact-checking project with RMIT University, noted that the ban affects the audience that fact-checkers want to reach. This suggests that the ban may have unintended consequences for the spread of misinformation, as Facebook's partnership with fact-checking organisations becomes less effective in reaching a wider audience.
In summary, Facebook's news ban in Australia has had a notable impact on the access to reliable information for Australians. It has limited the availability of trusted news sources, increased the presence of misleading content, and affected Facebook's fact-checking partnerships. The ban has also inadvertently blocked non-news content, further restricting access to important information for Australian users. While Facebook has worked to rectify some of these issues, the overall impact on the information landscape in Australia has been significant.
Converting Pounds to Australian Dollars: Understanding Exchange Rates
You may want to see also
Effect on Australian publishers
Facebook's ban on Australian news content has had a significant impact on Australian publishers. All Australian news organisations are restricted from posting content to their Facebook pages, and Australian users are unable to link to news articles from Australian or international news sites. This restriction also applies to the sharing of news content from Australian publishers globally.
The ban has disrupted the ability of Australian publishers to reach their audiences and disseminate information. Facebook acknowledged that the ban would impact publishers, noting that the platform helped Australian publishers earn A$407 million (£228 million; $316 million) in the previous year through referrals. The social media platform also conceded that its broad definition of "news content" led to the inadvertent blocking of non-news pages, including some government health departments, emergency services, charities, and community organisations. These pages were later reinstated after Facebook was notified.
The ban has also affected the public's access to reliable information and increased the spread of misleading content. Critics argue that the ban has made it more challenging for Australians to access trustworthy news sources, particularly those who rely solely on Facebook for news. This has resulted in a rise in the influence of misinformation, with an increase in misleading posts about COVID-19 and vaccines observed after the ban.
Facebook's action has sparked a debate about the relationship between social media platforms and news publishers. Facebook contends that the proposed Media Bargaining Law fails to recognise the value its platform provides to publishers and penalises the company for content it did not produce or solicit. The Australian government, on the other hand, asserts that the law aims to address the imbalance of power between digital giants and traditional news media, ensuring that original journalistic content is appropriately valued and compensated.
The ban has also had economic implications for Australian publishers. Facebook had planned to increase its investments with local publishers and launch Facebook News in Australia, but the legislation caused the company to redirect its investments to other countries. This has resulted in a loss of potential revenue and exposure for Australian publishers, impacting their ability to reach and engage with audiences through Facebook's vast platform.
Australia's Political Leanings: Conservative Government?
You may want to see also
Facebook's future in Australia
The ban not only affected news organisations but also had a significant impact on government departments, charities, and community pages. Many Australian government health and emergency services pages found themselves blocked, including the Bureau of Meteorology, state health departments, and the Western Australian opposition leader's page. This led to criticism from the Australian government, with Treasurer Josh Frydenberg calling the ban on news information a "huge community impact" and stating that Facebook's actions were "unnecessary and wrong".
Facebook, however, defended its position, arguing that news content accounted for only a small percentage of content in users' news feeds and that Facebook drove significant traffic to Australian news websites. The company also stated that it had inadvertently over-blocked pages due to the lack of clear guidance on the definition of news content in the proposed law.
In the wake of the ban, there were concerns about the spread of misinformation on Facebook, as users were no longer able to share or access reliable news sources. This was particularly concerning with Australia's Covid-19 vaccine rollout and the need for accurate health information.
Despite the initial conflict, Facebook and the Australian government have since reached an agreement, and Facebook has restored news access for Australians. Facebook stated that the Australian government agreed to make changes and provide guarantees that addressed their core concerns. As a result, Facebook indicated that it would continue to invest in public interest journalism and work collaboratively with publishers in Australia.
While the immediate conflict has been resolved, the episode highlights the ongoing tensions between social media giants like Facebook and governments seeking to regulate their impact on traditional news media. Facebook's future in Australia will likely continue to be shaped by these regulatory efforts and the company's response to them.
Deadly Australian Spiders: Who Are Their Predators?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Facebook restricted Australian users from sharing or viewing Australian and international news content in response to Australia's proposed new Media Bargaining law.
The law seeks to make digital giants like Facebook and Google pay traditional news media businesses for generating original journalistic content.
The ban affected not just news publishers but also emergency services, health departments, charities, politicians, sports groups, and other non-news organisations.
Facebook said that the law sought to "penalise Facebook for content it didn't take or ask for" and that it offered much more benefit to news companies than it gained from them.
Following discussions with the Australian government, Facebook agreed to a number of changes and guarantees that addressed their core concerns. As a result, Facebook restored news access for Australians and continued to invest in public interest journalism.
