Facebooks Australian News Blackout


We're gonna stop me on the side of the world We've news or rather the lack of news on facebook in australia uses. There can no longer cheryl read news articles from australian or international publishers in a row over proposed legislation from the australian government. Alex hold my hand here. What is going on in two thousand eighteen. The australian government regulator lotion inquiry into impact. Face what we're having on competition particularly around advertising and they found that there was imbalance of power between tech firms and the media and they recommended a code of conduct. That was very long complicated. But essentially it meant that they were gonna get share advertising revenue. Or there's going to be some sort of deal struck between those platforms. Giggle went okay and started making deals news. Koa is probably the biggest one and facebook is just pulled all of the australian new sites off its platform as a sort of nuclear option and basically said well. We've done what you asked. What do you want to do now. And it's almost felt like an empty threat when threatened to do it last year. Now it's real ever all they really did mean and that's a surprise you know. Isn't it clearly just abandoning the best. I think the most interesting thing. It's the perfect storm with australia. Because there are big enough country that that it's significant around the world. Everyone's watching to see what comes out of this. But the people in the world understands what precisely and but they're still not in the top twenty countries a facebook users so business of apps article said that australia's population twenty four male. So even if everybody in australia was facebook using adult they would still only reached nineteenth place of most popular facebook countries regardless of the politics. Heavy steve it just isn't good. Pr for facebook is it. And then i must have made the decision that it doesn't matter that is bad. Pr but i mean for one thing but extensively refusing to pay nominal tax you know despite being one of the world's biggest companies and for another thing when the middle of pandemic and that turning off news to an aging demographic who using service. You might want to know where they vaccines are at. I think when the period of time where the hall of this kind of disinformation machinery during the presidential election the criticism of getting rather just pull out completely out of australia doesn't send a good message to uses. All united see news. App is trying to get factually promptly check journalists and now it just smacks The valley it signed by. Maybe perhaps google is by by playing ball a little bit more with the content providers. I think in this convenient this information east of you want facebook to be really kind of suppose could quality journalism given alex is essentially while we're different to google search engines because publishes willingly upload their content to us and so they volunteering the information to us and why should we pay them to provide them with the platform. But it's not really true. I mean don't you have to basically have your content on facebook. I three years ago. You definitely did. i think. Now it's a case of across all publishers. Most of publishers facebook traffic will come from users sharing their stories to their own pages so they won't come from the brand themselves and so the bruns choices to publish that story. But it's not to publish on facebook necessarily. It's the question of whether or not then. Publishers have benefited by having face because platform so so particularly in all the users all the users go to facebook and then they click through for news rather than going to a new site for news which is something that the entire news industry is desperately trying to change. Probably new york times to the front of that bbc and the daily mail been leading on that for a while so the question is should facebook pay when people prefer platform to a news homepage. And that's difficult. All depends on whether or not publishers need. Facebook more than facebook. Needs publishes and i do not know the answer to that question also opposed goes to the heart of the origins of the open web. Doesn't it steve. Because the whole point of the way that the world wide web was built walls you can always linked to something for free. You can refer someone to something for free. That's not the same as publishing. That's how wikipedia works that's how other sites that are the facts about this work. Some applies in the state. Okay off the bolted. But i think we'll be interested to find out if that kind of sliding mole Content makers these big platforms whether that does really benefit that does is it going to increase the goss. Subscriptions by being late to secure gle by having that league that click from facebook. Is it going gonna financially benefit the middle lousy probably fund that journalism but also like who's getting the money and that's the other thing isn't it. Do we say in the case of google. You're saying google play pool. I mean that's true. That was a threat. Basically from being wasn't disable we'll pay in that kind of seemed to them a little bit. But do you say great. Journalism is being properly funded by google. Because they're going to give some money to news corp every time you click the link or do you say oh sorry open web. It was nice while it lasted but actually turns out we promote it was going to get the money anyway. The idea of the open wipe is tricky in anyway because as increasingly more sites are finding out a subscription model is is a way to have more stable income rather than appetizing income. Once it got a discussion there is no right. Answer that both valid but when it comes to how you fund journalism which journalism you decide is worthy of funding is stuff that is well read worthy of funding or is it only meaningful investigations. Take six months and nobody reads. Is that the sort of stuff. You should be funding. And who draws the line and where is that line drawn about what is worthy journalism. And what is just stuff that you found out that you're writing about and both valid like says it takes sports. Journalism is that valid journalism. And should that be funded. Is that less or more worth than a quick story about somebody who's been defrauded. It's a difficult thing about whether you make that judgment. The same as every publications editor is the story. Worthy should be a newsweek story. Is a bbc stories at wherever story. How do you workout. How you fund those things if you're a third party platform but also another reason that it seems that google have stumped up now as an an onion australia but the presumption is this might roll out elsewhere as well obviously is that they're launching. Google news showcase which is a new product isn't it. I think you need to google news app to see in the uk. So i haven't have you and also as a publisher as an editor. Does he really did these. Things really actually make any different. I mean how many links referrals do you get from sites like that and apple news really. I'm going to speak very vaguely about the level of traffic. That person's gusty. I think is the price of talking to say. I would puglia shame. The news traffic is significant across globally. So that it's it's not an insignificant patriot figures when you talk about the level of loyalty brings the branding. That's more difficult question. And there are no clear answers on that but take facebook facebook as you start. It's news initiative so announced the already launched in the us but announces launching in the uk. The next few weeks of that that plans to pay news publishers to be partnered with facebook so that that type of model is beginning already and we know that. Facebook and google provide huge amounts of traffic to publishers across the world. The ones where there're affiliate content and have been around for a while so we know so flipboard poker apple news. Are they actually significant. There's a user. They don't seem to me to be at yes that Flipboard is still flipboard user. Bases shrunk over the recent years because of google's controversial push towards its an platforms above flip boat but they are still all big traffic drivers. And if you're looking full patriots all of those are valid and can drive millions of patriot. Each month i think so once you get into the real multinational website so much sites. It's less of a percentage for this sites that that could be a huge jump in traffic. That could be thirty. Forty percent and on the smaller sites steve. A you mentioned misinformation an arguably. Actually if you've got kind of legit sources adding revenue for placement on sites like google. It away you can be sure about the quality of the journalism but at the same time you end up with a which is why the web existed you end up with that. A two lane highway. Don't you wear the smaller players and never given the prominence of the big players and it's actually harder to combat. Political narrative will propaganda that way than it would be otherwise it yet. I i suppose that's why you need to look a look at these other platforms. That are kind of imagine like capacity people having the different compensations. What you might get some full sensitive information beth. I wonder if that to access journalism days is always going to exist in some full and the people he won't say will find it but that he wants incentivized Look beyond really manny while they were

Coming up next