Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
FACEBOOK HAS REJECTED calls from the Australian government and news companies that it share advertising revenue with the media, suggesting it would rather cut news content from its platform.
The US tech giant said in a submission to Australia’s competition watchdog that news represents a “very small fraction” of the content in an average user’s news feed.
“If there were no news content available on Facebook in Australia, we are confident the impact on Facebook’s community metrics and revenues in Australia would not be significant,” it said in a thinly veiled threat to boycott local news companies.
“Given the social value and benefit to news publishers, we would strongly prefer to continue enabling news publishers’ content to be available on our platform,” it said.
In an effort being closely watched around the world, Australia is set to unveil plans to force Facebook and Google to share advertising revenue they earn from news featured in their services.
The initiative has been strongly pushed by Australia’s two biggest media companies, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp and Nine Entertainment.
They argue that the crisis roiling the news industry worldwide is mainly because of Google, Facebook and other large tech firms capturing the vast majority of online advertising revenues, without fairly compensating media companies for advertisements placed against news content.
Newspapers’ loss of advertising dollars has forced cutbacks and bankruptcies across the sector, a process exacerbated by the economic downturn caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
More than 170 newsrooms have seen cuts or halted publication in recent years.
Code of conduct
Australia’s competition regulator, the ACCC, has estimated that Google and Facebook together earn some $6 billion (€3.6 billion) a year from advertising in the country.
Leading news publishers have demanded the two companies pay at least 10 percent of that money each year to local news organisations.
Google last month already rejected the demand, saying it made barely Aus$10 million a year from news-linked advertising.
Google and Facebook both argue they provide hundreds of millions of dollars in value to Australian news companies by driving traffic to their websites, where they can be monetised through ads or turned into paying subscribers.
“We allow news organisations of all sizes, not just the big ones, to post links, raise awareness of their brands and drive monetisable traffic to their websites, free of charge,” said Mia Garlick, Facebook’s director of public policy for Australia and New Zealand.
Facebook and Google also say they provide millions of dollars to media companies through grant programmes and limited purchases of news content.
Both companies say they are willing to participate on a collaborative “code of conduct” in Australia to mediate complaints, provide greater transparency in how they rank and distribute news on their platforms and share data on user interactions with their content.
But Facebook insisted today it was “not healthy” to expect two private companies to solve the challenges facing Australian media.
The rejection bodes ill for ACCC-led negotiations. The watchdog has until the end of July to draw up the final code, which the government has vowed to implement quickly.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Verrimus. Ex British Spooks. 100% Honest and reliable so…….
Ireland moving on a progressive modern country? Your comment and Enda not suggesting so …
Why are people going out of their way to make Verrimus look bad? They never implicated anyone.. not did they trigger the suspicions of GSOC.
It’s quite interesting the number of people who have commented on Verrimus in the recent days. One would almost be tempted to call it astroturfing. The issue really really shouldn’t be about the findings of that company.. they can not and have not been shown to be false or misleading.
People have lost sight of the main issue altogether.. GSOC believed that a breach had taken place because some Gardai knew about stuff they shouldn’t have known about. Did Cooke address this at all? =/
Is there someone in GSOC leaking info, are the media somehow implicit? The entire report just addresses presuppositions that people had made, without actually getting to the bottom of anything, and it raises more questions than it answers.
Verrimus are experienced professionals in this field. If you read the Cooke report you will see that they performed their duties properly and co-operated fully with Cooke. I’m a techie and I could tell that these guys really know what they are talking about. In my opinion, anyone who is trying to discredit them, or their findings must have a vested interest. If you read the full report and you think that there was no surveillance, then you are an idiot.
The Cooke report is a very well orchastrated attempt to deliver facts which cannot be argued whilst ignoring a huge amount of unadressed issues.
I’ve read a lot of things from a lot of sources and the more I read, the more the Cooke report seems like a wishy washy but cleverly written document.
It’s basically the “Nothing to see here, move along” report.
So they people paid to look into this said it was never in their remit, the people who were been bugged said they weren’t been bugged and the people doing the bugging said they didn’t , I am glad that’s all cleared up then, all this from a judge, sounds about right
LM Group’s daily rant…like clockwork!
Mark, I presume you are a guard, I only deal with facts, something the guards no nothing about,
what fact??
Is that you Boylan , how’s the new truck going
I’m not really sure who’s patronising who here…
This is so typical. The deniers out in full force. It’s a cover up. It’s a conspiracy. It’s a …. whatever you’re having yourself. Risible. Move along there lads. You’re embarrassing yourselves – again.
Thats right John because past and present governments have an umblemished record when it comes to uncovering the truth on their own misgivings don’t they?
have your say