Google brought out’carrots’. Facebook swung the’whip’. The two platform companies took opposite steps against the typhoon of’contents provision’ from Australia.
It is the’News Media Negotiation Act’ that Australia has been ambitiously promoting since last year that forced them to choose. The law focuses on charging copyright fees when news is used in Google Search or Facebook News Feed.
When the law goes into effect, the two companies must finish negotiations with media companies for content provision within 90 days. If negotiations break down, a government-appointed coordinator will be involved.
The involvement of the mediator is likely to put more weight on the Australian press. Google and Facebook are complaining.
Google, big news contract… Facebook bans news sharing
In the face of this pressure, the two companies took a completely different course. Google has signed a series of news contracts with potentially threatening media outlets.
The two major news groups in Australia, Nine Entertainment and Seven West Media Group, negotiated copyright fees in succession. It is a large contract with an annual content provision fee of 26 billion won.
It also signed a multi-year contract with News Corporation, led by Rupert Murdoch. The specific contract size was not disclosed.
On the other hand, Facebook declared a breakthrough. It has put out a drastic prescription for’no sharing of news content’. First of all, Australians can’t do news sharing itself. Articles from not only Australia but also foreign media are prohibited from being shared.
Users outside of Australia cannot share articles from Australian media. This is because if it is shared, Facebook has to pay a fee for the media.
Why do the two companies look completely different? First, let’s listen to Facebook’s explanation.
“Google search is closely tied to news. Moreover, media companies do not provide content voluntarily. On the other hand, media companies voluntarily chose to share on Facebook. Through this, traffic and subscribers are further increased, and advertising revenue is also increased.”
Facebook says that media companies are already benefiting from their platforms, and it is unfair to give them additional copyrights.
Facebook’s actions were expected to some extent. As the controversy over false information intensified recently, Facebook pulled out a card titled’Restriction of news exposure’.
This move is related to Facebook’s gaze at the platform. Facebook claims that it is not a platform that distributes news. It is argued that it is a space for conversation and communication with people close to you. He also criticizes “Go away from media companies dissatisfied with Facebook’s algorithm.”
Even if they completely block news sharing, they are also confident that they will not lose money. He said he would not set a precedent for giving’the price of sharing news’ in a situation where he has already given as much benefit to the media.
It is burdensome for Google to set a precedent for’the price of sharing search’ in Australia. So Google took a detour. ‘News Showcase’ is a method of solving the usage fee request through the service. All royalty contracts signed with Australian media groups are in exchange for participation in the’News Showcase’.
It is a strategy that turns the risks of the’News Media Negotiation Act’ into opportunities for spreading new services.
Significantly different from the case of the corona 19 false information
Google’s and Facebook’s move is a little different from the time of the corona 19 controversy. At that time, YouTube, a Google affiliate, actively blocked the controversy over’overregulation’. On the other hand, Facebook chose loose regulations that focus on’freedom of expression’. Trump refrained from taking possible deletions even when posting inflammatory posts.
However, the Australian News Media Negotiation Act came up with a prescription for banning news sharing at all. Even considering the position that “the press has already enjoyed a sufficient price after choosing to share on Facebook voluntarily,” it is somewhat contradictory.
Again, I recall the first sentence of Charles Dickens’ Tale of Two Cities.
“It was the best and worst, the age of wisdom and the age of foolishness. It was a century of faith and of doubt, a season of light and a season of darkness. It was a spring of hope and a winter of despair.”
Related Articles
Facebook “Can’t share news in Australia”
Google pays 25.7 billion annual copyright fees to Australian media giant
Australia and Google “Pay the news fee, can’t pay” workshop
[김익현의 미디어 읽기] The story of the two companies… Opposing platform strategies between Google and Facebook
How should we look at the two companies’ choice, Facebook and Google? Is it the best or the worst? Is it the product of wisdom or foolishness?
In conjunction with another theme of accountability and neutrality of the giant platform, the two companies’ conflicting policies keep resonating.