Google threatens to shut down search in Australia over digital news code

[garbon]

Some interesting points in this piece.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/19/facebook-is-gambling-australia-cant-live-without-it-imagine-if-we-prove-them-wrong

Some commentators reckon Facebook has called Australia's bluff. They may be about to discover that Australia isn't bluffing.

The platform's own irresponsible and chaotic implementation of its Australian news "ban" appears to have rallied the country – citizens and politicians from across the aisles – and governments from around the world, to support the Australian government's resolve.

As a former chief executive of Facebook in Australia and New Zealand, Stephen Scheeler, wrote in the Nine newspapers, the company has taken an enormous gamble, betting that "by taking an aggressive hard line with a middle power, such as Australia, a tough message will be sent to the rest of the world to back off on regulation."

But, as he says, there is an alternative scenario. "When you pull a government's pants down in front of the world, you leave it little option but to dig in. When you vandalise 13 million citizens' news feeds as a bargaining chip, you raise the stakes ... So witnessing a standoff between Australia and Facebook could be the catalyst for genuine global reform. It could be that future historians of the internet come to see this decision as the moment the world sat up and started to take serious action on making Big Tech accountable to society."

So far, that second scenario is playing out.

It's hard to think of a better way for a platform to anger a nation and destroy what's left of its own reputation than to block health and hospital sites in a pandemic, emergency service sites in a state that recently battled bushfires and the sites of innumerable welfare groups, charities and community organisations, all in a bid to avoid making payments under a new media bargaining code that aims to address the power imbalance between media companies and the big tech platforms.

It didn't take long for comparisons to be made about how easy it had been for Facebook to shut down real, factual news and how difficult it had claimed the task of shutting down "fake" news and misinformation, or even shutting off the livestream of a massacre,or for questions to be asked about how a company that is supposed to be all about "connecting the world" could so blithely disconnect factual news from an entire nation, leaving the top-performing links to news-adjacent comedy sites and satire.

Facebook's response, that the breadth of its ban was due to the definition of news in the proposed code, makes no sense since the code is not yet law, and the company immediately began reversing some of the blocks as they were publicised by outraged users.

So far it has succeeded in strengthening the government's resolve. The prime minister says, pointedly, that threats are not a good way to deal with his government.

Google, the other media giant that faced being forced into negotiation and arbitration with news companies under the code, found a workaround.

In order to avoid setting the legal precedent of paying for news appearing in search, it has done deals of similar magnitude with Australian media companies large and small for stories to appear in its Showcase service. The government has achieved its aim of getting the platform to pay the news companies, and Google has avoided the precedent. The government retains the ability to activate the letter of the law and force payment for news appearing in search at any time in the future, as a means of ensuring the voluntary deals are not eroded over time, or denied to smaller and mid-sized publishers once the needs of the big end of town are met.

...

[Sheilbh]

I think there's a lot to that and it's not just middle powers or Facebook.

I read a really interesting piece - somewhere - about how the US tech companies were learning that they needed to change their approach and lobbying strategy outside of the US. I think it was in the context of European privacy and now other data rules.

Facebook and Google especially went in very hard and were aggressive on why lots of these changes weren't necessary, were technically impossible and should just be opposed. It was noted that basically that approach might work in the US but it just doesn't translate in Europe or - I think parliamentary systems - because once the government or the EU has decided to regulate something, then it will be regulated and the question is how. Just outright opposing something doesn't get you anything.

The better strategy, I think, is to basically say you agree with the idea of regulation and some of the principles but have practical suggestions on how to change it - you might be able to help write it. I think Apple learned this earlier than the other tech companies because of its competition issues, I think Google has now learned it and Facebook is the last remaining hold out of a very belligerent approach.

So there's some controversial digital regulations going through in Europe and the UK at the minute and generally social media companies are "engaging" rather than just outright opposing/trying to block.

[Admiral Yi]

The lesson Google appears to have learned based on Grab On's article is that if they give the Australian government a face saving gesture they can continue to perform business as usual, at least for a while.